The reading brain extracts syntactic information from multiple words within 50 milliseconds

Snell, Joshua

doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2023.105664

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Varieties of the "flanker paradigm" (Eriksen & Eriksen, 1974) have demonstrated that judgments of one target word are influenced by the characteristics of nearby, task-irrelevant words Snell, Mathôt, et al, 2018;, but see Broadbent & Gathercole, 1990). That is true even when the whole display is flashed for 50 ms and then masked (Snell, 2024). Moreover, there is a "sentence superiority effect": when the words that are flashed along with the target form a sentence, the target is reported more accurately than when the word order is scrambled Wen et al, 2019).…”

Section: Relation To the Wider Literature On Serial Versus Parallel W...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reinventing the redundant target paradigm to distinguish serial and parallel processing of written words

White,

Palmer,

Sanders

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The visual system can encode many stimuli across the visual field simultaneously, but the number of objects that can be fully identified in parallel is limited. At the extreme, some objects might have to be identified serially. One useful tool for distinguishing parallel from serial processing is the redundant target paradigm, which compares responses to displays containing one target to displays containing two targets. Many parallel models predict a positive redundant target effect: faster correct responses to two targets. Here we revisit the redundant target paradigm by developing and testing predictions for a standard self-terminating serial model that accounts for the accuracy as well as the speed of each response. Surprisingly, it predicts slower responses to two-target displays than one-target displays. To test that prediction, we conducted three experiments that each measured performance for three different judgments of written words: color detection (detecting colored letters), lexical decision (detecting real words among pseudowords), and semantic categorization (detecting nouns that refer to living things). In all the experiments, only the color detection task yielded a positive redundant target effect, while the lexical and semantic tasks yielded zero or negative effects. These results are consistent with low-level features (color) for two stimuli being processed in parallel, while the meanings of two words are processed serially. Altogether, this study informs models of reading and furthers the development of general theories of response time that include errors.

show abstract