Perceptual and Cognitive Factors Imposing “Speed Limits” on Reading Rate: A Study with the Rapid Serial Visual Presentation

Abstract

Adults read at high speed, but estimates of their reading rate vary greatly, i.e., from 100 to 1500 words per minute (wpm). This discrepancy is likely due to different recording methods and to the different perceptual and cognitive processes involved in specific test conditions. The present study investigated the origins of these notable differences in RSVP reading rate (RR). In six experiments we investigated the role of many different perceptual and cognitive variables. The presence of a mask caused a steep decline in reading rate, with an estimated masking cost of about 200 wpm. When the decoding process was isolated, RR approached values of 1200 wpm. When the number of stimuli exceeded the short-term memory span, RR decreased to 800 wpm. The semantic context contributed to reading speed only by a factor of 1.4. Finally, eye movements imposed an upper limit on RR (around 300 wpm). Overall, data indicate a speed limit of 300 wpm, which corresponds to the time needed for eye movement execution, i.e., the most time consuming mechanism. Results reconcile differences in reading rates reported by different laboratories and thus provide suggestions for targeting different components of reading rate.

How many words do we read per minute? A review and meta-analysis of reading rate

“…The fastest participant went up to the maximum possible speed of 1,652 wpm. This speed was also obtained by six of the nine participants when the words were presented after each other on the same place (rapid serial visual presentation), so that the participants did not have to move their eyes, making the authors conclude that eye movements put a limit to the maximum reading speed in normal reading (see also Primativo, Spinelli, Zoccolotti, De Luca, & Martelli, 2016)..…”

Neural capacity limits during unconscious semantic processing

“…The main effect of masking was significant, with participants overall responding 18 ms faster on unmasked trials than on masked trials ( F 1,17 = 13.56, P = 0.002). This finding concurs with a recent behavioral study showing that visual masking induces a steep decline in reading rate under rapid serial presentation (Primativo et al ., ). The main effect of congruency was also significant ( F 1,17 = 7.13, P = 0.016), with participants responding 12 ms faster when subjects and verbs were congruent than when incongruent.…”

“…That is, it can be argued that even longer sequences of masked words (e.g., three or more words) might produce similar ERP effects if they were presented at faster rates and within the time frame of 400 ms prior to target onset. This is possible asthe speed limits of reading rate, although slowing down under visual masking, are shown to lie around 400 WPM during reading aloud (Primativo et al ., ), which seems to exceed the word presentation rate during masked trials in the present study (300 WPM). Conversely, however, it is also possible that such higher WPM rates produce only weaker ERP effects, as there is a trade‐off between speed and accuracy in reading comprehension, that is, an optimal WPM for fluent sentence comprehension is thought to be approximately 300 WPM (Carver, ; Rayner et al ., ), whereas higher WPMs are prone to impede meaning analysis (Schotter et al ., ; Benedetto et al ., ).…”

Age-related changes in crowding and reading speed

“…74 . Also see Primativo et al .’s 77 for variability in reading speed estimates across different measurement methods). Thus, it is possible that our flashcard reading measure might have amplified any potential difference in reading speed between older and younger adults.…”