Reading by extracting invariant line junctions in typical and atypical young readers
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, ISSN: 0022-0965, Vol: 183, Page: 75-99
2019
- 4Citations
- 19Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
We aimed at investigating whether typical and atypical young readers extract vertices (viewpoint-invariant line junctions) in reading, as has been shown for fluent adult readers. In an identification task, we presented partly deleted printed letters, words, and pseudowords, preserving either the vertices or the midsegments of the letters. This allowed assessing the occurrence of a vertex effect, that is, more errors when vertices are partly removed, keeping the midsegments intact, than in the reverse situation. In Experiment 1, the vertex effect was observed on words and pseudowords in three groups of typical readers: 48 adults, 56 beginning readers (Grades 2 and 3), and 42 more advanced readers (Grades 4 and 5). Yet, the effect was smaller in the beginning readers, in relation to their irregular word reading skills. In Experiment 2, we compared 40 children with dyslexia with children selected from Experiment 1 to match them on either chronological age (30 CA controls) or reading level (42 RL controls). Although all groups displayed a vertex effect on words and pseudowords, dyslexic children presented a smaller effect than CA controls without differing from RL controls. The whole result pattern suggests that vertices play an important role in the recognition of written strings not only in skilled adult readers but also in young readers, in relation to their actual reading skills rather than to a specific reading deficit.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022096518300195; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2019.01.020; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85062546693&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30856419; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022096518300195; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2019.01.020
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know