Letter perception: from pixels to pandemonium

Grainger, Jonathan; Rey, Arnaud; Dufau, Stéphane

doi:10.1016/j.tics.2008.06.006

Cited by 171 publications

(136 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

114

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They consist of two-dimensional visual patterns associated with a single name, and in most alphabetic writing systems each letter can be represented by uppercase and lowercase forms (i.e., BA^and Ba^are both associated with the letter name in French, /a/). Due to their visual simplicity, on one hand, and their variability on various dimensions (e.g., size, shape, case), on the other, letters present several interesting properties for the experimental study of reading processes and visual perception (Grainger, Rey, & Dufau, 2008). With this kind of simple and easy-to-control experimental material, several recent studies have shed new light on the functional organization of letter perception and on its temporal dynamics.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The time course of visual influences in letter recognition

Madec

Goff

Riès

et al. 2016

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study builds on a specific characteristic of letters of the Roman alphabet-namely, that each letter name is associated with two visual formats, corresponding to their uppercase and lowercase versions. Participants had to read aloud the names of single letters, and event-related potentials (ERPs) for six pairs of visually dissimilar upper-and lowercase letters were recorded. Assuming that the end product of processing is the same for upper-and lowercase letters sharing the same vocal response, ERPs were compared backward, starting from the onset of articulatory responses, and the first significant divergence was observed 120 ms before response onset. Given that naming responses were produced at around 414 ms, on average, these results suggest that letter processing is influenced by visual information until 294 ms after stimulus onset. This therefore provides new empirical evidence regarding the time course and interactive nature of visual letter perception processes.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The time course of visual influences in letter recognition

Madec

Goff

Riès

et al. 2016

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Summarizing more than 70 published studies on letter confusability, Grainger, Rey, and Dufau (2008) described the features as "mainly consisting of lines of different orientation and curvature" (p. 381). These are local features.…”

Section: Feature Detectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, common manipulations (low contrast and rapid presentation) make low spatial frequencies appear more important and, hence, are more likely to reveal global features (Fiset et al, 2008). Grainger et al (2008) and Fiset et al (2009) noted that letters must be degraded to create confusions, and this can influence the nature of the confusions. In fact, support for this argument was obtained by Bouma (1971), who compared two different manipulations (long reading distance and eccentric vision) and found differences in the pattern of confusions.…”

Section: Feature Detectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Letter processing and font information during reading: Beyond distinctiveness, where vision meets design

Sanocki

Dyson

2011

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Letter identification is a critical front end of the reading process. In general, conceptualizations of the identification process have emphasized arbitrary sets of distinctive features. However, a richer view of letter processing incorporates principles from the field of type design, including an emphasis on uniformities across letters within a font. The importance of uniformities is supported by a small body of research indicating that consistency of font increases letter identification efficiency. We review design concepts and the relevant literature, with the goal of stimulating further thinking about letter processing during reading.Keywords Letter identification . Letter perception . Font . Font tuning . Common features . Type design . Reading Motivated by the increasing realization that letter perception is an important but overlooked stage in the reading process (e.g., Finkbeiner & Coltheart, 2009;Grainger, 2008;Massaro & Schmuller, 1975;Pelli, Burns, Farell, & Moore-Page, 2006), there has been a resurgence of interest in letter perception in relation to reading. It is now clear that letter perception provides a critical front end for reading because letters are functional units; they are independent pieces of the word code (e.g., McClelland, 1976;Oden, 1984;Pelli, Farell, & Moore, 2003). The visual forms of letters exist within a larger structural design, a family of objects known as the type font. This idea has implications for perceptual identification that we begin to develop here.In previous research and theory, a core concept is distinctiveness-the properties that make one letter easy to discriminate from its alternatives in the alphabet. This has led to the central concept of feature detection in the literature (e.g., Fiset et al., 2008;Gibson, 1969;Massaro & Schmuller, 1975). Letters are defined by sets of features whose membership is determined by distinctiveness. If distinctiveness is indeed critical, increasing it through alphabet design should increase legibility. This logic has been recently advocated (e.g., Fiset et al., 2008;Gosselin & Tjan, 2008).1 However, if letter distinctiveness is an incomplete basis for understanding letter processing during reading, calls to redesign letters are premature.A richer view of letter processing incorporates structural relations between letters and originates in the field of type design. Type designers have long been concerned with letter form and its impact on reading. Text fonts are designed for reading continuous paragraphs of text, and the main goal in their design is to produce optimally legible letter forms. Type designers recognize the importance of distinctiveness, but they also emphasize the uniformity of letters (e.g., Carter, Day, & Meggs, 1985;Cheng, 2005). The classical goal of 1 The idea of improving legibility through research and design is not new. Modifications to increase distinctiveness have been explored by Kolers (1969), Crist (1980), and, more recently, Beier andLarson (2010). A modification that was actually used (mainly...

show abstract

“…Accordingly, lett er identifi cation is achieved by hierarchically organized layers of feature and lett er detectors (Finkbeiner & Coltheart, 2009;Grainger, Rey, & Dufau, 2008;Selfridge, 1959;Selfridge & Neisser, 1960). Research using psychophysical techniques has revealed that lett ers are identifi ed via their constituent features (e.g., Jacobs, Nazir, & Heller, 1989;Solomon & Pelli, 1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Letter Visibility and the Optimal Viewing Position Effect of Isolated Connected and Un-Connected Letters in Arabic

Ganayim¹

2015

Psychology of Language and Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Th e present study provides a further exploration of the role of Arabic lett er visibility as a possible cause of the Optimal Viewing Position (OVP) eff ect. We used isolated connected and un-connected Arabic lett ers of diff erent shapes (basic, initial, medial, fi nal) placed at the center of fi xation (Experiment 1) and at various possible positions in isolated presentation (Experiment 2). In order to investigate whether performance in the visual identifi cation task is modulated by lett er type, we presented each of the isolated connected and un-connected lett er targets in each of the eleven stimulus positions across the array to produce a mean RT (ms) for each of the lett er types. Using the initial fi xation paradigm enabled us to compare reaction times with correctly identifi ed lett er targets appearing in the diff erent possible positions. Th e fi ndings of the present experiments demonstrated that visual lett er recognition is infl uenced by: (i) the isolated lett ers' type (connected, un-connected), as connected lett ers are easier to recognize than un-connected lett ers; (ii) isolated lett ers' shape (basic, initial, medial, fi nal), as medial and fi nal are harder to recognize than basic and initial lett er shapes; (iii) visual fi eld, as reading rates were longer for lett er stimuli that were presented in LVF compared to RVF; and (iv) eccentricity, as lett er reading rates were correlated with their eccentric placement.

show abstract

Letter perception: from pixels to pandemonium

Cited by 171 publications

References 52 publications

The time course of visual influences in letter recognition

The time course of visual influences in letter recognition

Letter processing and font information during reading: Beyond distinctiveness, where vision meets design

Letter Visibility and the Optimal Viewing Position Effect of Isolated Connected and Un-Connected Letters in Arabic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About