Helena Ghorbani, Gülcenur Özturan, Andrea Albonico, Jason J S Barton
{"title":"阅读文字与看字体或书写风格:一项半脑区处理的研究。","authors":"Helena Ghorbani, Gülcenur Özturan, Andrea Albonico, Jason J S Barton","doi":"10.1007/s00221-024-06986-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Tachistoscopic studies have established a right field advantage for the perception of visually presented words, which has been interpreted as reflecting a left hemispheric specialization. However, it is not clear whether this is driven by the linguistic task of word processing, or also occurs when processing properties such as the style and regularity of text. We had 23 subjects perform a tachistoscopic study while they viewed five-letter words in either computer font or handwriting. The task in one block was to respond if the word in the peripheral field matched a word just seen in the central field. In a second block with the same stimuli, the task was to respond if the style (handwriting or font) matched. We found a main effect of task: there was a right-field advantage for reading the word, but no field advantage for reporting the style of text. There was no effect of stimulus type and no interaction between task and stimulus type. We conclude that the field advantage for processing text is driven by the task, being specific for the processing the identity of the word and not the perception of the style of the text. We did not find evidence to support prior assertions that the type of text and its regularity influenced the field advantage during the word-reading task.</p>","PeriodicalId":12268,"journal":{"name":"Experimental Brain Research","volume":"243 2","pages":"45"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reading words versus seeing font or handwriting style: a study of hemifield processing.\",\"authors\":\"Helena Ghorbani, Gülcenur Özturan, Andrea Albonico, Jason J S Barton\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00221-024-06986-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Tachistoscopic studies have established a right field advantage for the perception of visually presented words, which has been interpreted as reflecting a left hemispheric specialization. However, it is not clear whether this is driven by the linguistic task of word processing, or also occurs when processing properties such as the style and regularity of text. We had 23 subjects perform a tachistoscopic study while they viewed five-letter words in either computer font or handwriting. The task in one block was to respond if the word in the peripheral field matched a word just seen in the central field. In a second block with the same stimuli, the task was to respond if the style (handwriting or font) matched. We found a main effect of task: there was a right-field advantage for reading the word, but no field advantage for reporting the style of text. There was no effect of stimulus type and no interaction between task and stimulus type. We conclude that the field advantage for processing text is driven by the task, being specific for the processing the identity of the word and not the perception of the style of the text. We did not find evidence to support prior assertions that the type of text and its regularity influenced the field advantage during the word-reading task.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12268,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Experimental Brain Research\",\"volume\":\"243 2\",\"pages\":\"45\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Experimental Brain Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-024-06986-6\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimental Brain Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-024-06986-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reading words versus seeing font or handwriting style: a study of hemifield processing.
Tachistoscopic studies have established a right field advantage for the perception of visually presented words, which has been interpreted as reflecting a left hemispheric specialization. However, it is not clear whether this is driven by the linguistic task of word processing, or also occurs when processing properties such as the style and regularity of text. We had 23 subjects perform a tachistoscopic study while they viewed five-letter words in either computer font or handwriting. The task in one block was to respond if the word in the peripheral field matched a word just seen in the central field. In a second block with the same stimuli, the task was to respond if the style (handwriting or font) matched. We found a main effect of task: there was a right-field advantage for reading the word, but no field advantage for reporting the style of text. There was no effect of stimulus type and no interaction between task and stimulus type. We conclude that the field advantage for processing text is driven by the task, being specific for the processing the identity of the word and not the perception of the style of the text. We did not find evidence to support prior assertions that the type of text and its regularity influenced the field advantage during the word-reading task.
期刊介绍:
Founded in 1966, Experimental Brain Research publishes original contributions on many aspects of experimental research of the central and peripheral nervous system. The focus is on molecular, physiology, behavior, neurochemistry, developmental, cellular and molecular neurobiology, and experimental pathology relevant to general problems of cerebral function. The journal publishes original papers, reviews, and mini-reviews.