September 2019
Volume 19, Issue 10
Open Access
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2019
Effort and Effortlessness in Visual Word Recognition
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Adi Shechter
    Department of Learning Disabilities, Edmond J. Safra Brain Research Center, Faculty of Education, University of Haifa, Israel
  • Tami Katzir
    Department of Learning Disabilities, Edmond J. Safra Brain Research Center, Faculty of Education, University of Haifa, Israel
  • David L. Share
    Department of Learning Disabilities, Edmond J. Safra Brain Research Center, Faculty of Education, University of Haifa, Israel
Journal of Vision September 2019, Vol.19, 33b. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/19.10.33b
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Adi Shechter, Tami Katzir, David L. Share; Effort and Effortlessness in Visual Word Recognition. Journal of Vision 2019;19(10):33b. https://doi.org/10.1167/19.10.33b.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Perhaps the most distinctive characteristic of skilled reading is the sheer speed and effortlessness of the word recognition process. Among reading researchers, there is an impressive consensus that fast, near-effortless recognition of printed words (often referred to as “automatic” or “fluent” word reading) is crucial to successful reading development because it enables the reader to devote limited processing resources to text meaning (LaBerge & Samuels, 1974; Perfetti, 1985). In contrast, there is little agreement about how to define automaticity or fluency, or how to operationalize these concepts (Moors & de Houwer, 2006; Stanovich, 1990). We report a study examining the applicability of pupillometry to the study of cognitive effort in word reading. We compared pupil dilation (as well as reading accuracy and pronunciation latencies) for naming familiar and unfamiliar letter strings (varying in length) among university students. Luminance levels, frequency and emotional valence of the target items were matched across conditions. Participants’ general mood and reading anxiety were also assessed. As anticipated, our data revealed a greater degree of cognitive effort, as assessed by pupil dilation, as well as lower accuracy and slower pronunciation latencies for unfamiliar (pseudoword) strings compared to familiar (real word) strings. In addition, the pronunciation of 5-letter pseudowords required more effort than 3-letter pseudowords as indicated by both greater pupil dilation and slower naming times. There were no length effects for familiar words. These findings, if replicated, not only open up new possibilities for studying the issue of effort and effortlessness in the field of visual word recognition, but also in clarifying the troublesome concepts of automaticity and fluency in word reading.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×