Abstract
Numerous studies indicate that dyslexic and nondyslexic individuals exhibit different patterns of sensitivity to spatial frequency. However, the extension of this effect to normal (nondyslexic) adults of good and poor reading abilities and the role played by different spatial frequencies in word perception have yet to be determined. In this study, using normal (nondyslexic) adults, we assessed reading ability, spatial frequency sensitivity, and perception of spatially filtered words and nonwords (using a twoalternative forced choice paradigm to avoid artifactual influences of nonperceptual guesswork). Good and poor readers showed different patterns of spatial frequency sensitivity. However, no differences in accuracy of word and nonword perception were found between good and poor readers, despite their differences in spatial frequency sensitivity. Indeed, both reading abilities showed the same superior perceptibility for spatially filtered words over nonwords across different spatial frequency bands. These findings indicate that spatial frequency sensitivity differences extend to normal (nondyslexic) adult readers and that a range of spatial frequencies can be used for word perception by good and poor readers. However, spatial frequency sensitivity may not accurately reveal an individual’s ability to perceive words.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Allen, P. A., &Emerson, P. L. (1991). Holism revisited: Evidence for parallel independent word-level and letter-level processors during word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,17, 489–511.
Allen, P. A., &Madden, D. J. (1990). Evidence for a parallel input serial analysis model of word processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 48–64.
Allen, P. A., Wallace, B., &Weber, T. A. (1995). Influence of case type, word frequency, and exposure duration on visual word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,21, 914–934.
Au, A., &Lovegrove, B. (2001). Temporal processing ability in above average and average readers.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 148–155.
Bailey, I. L., &Lovie, J. E. (1976). New design principles for visual acuity charts.American Journal of Optometry & Physiological Optics,53, 740–745.
Blakemore, C., &Campbell, F. W. (1969). On the existence of neurons in the human visual system selectively sensitive to the orientation and size of retinal images.Journal of Physiology,203, 237–260.
Boden, C., &Giaschi, D. (2000). The role of low spatial frequencies in reading: A masked priming study.Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science,41, S434.
Borsting, E., Ridder, W. H., III,Dudeck, K., Kelley, C., Matsui, L., &Motoyama, J. (1996). The presence of a magnocellular defect depends on the type of dyslexia.Vision Research,36, 1047–1053.
Brainard, D. H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox.Spatial Vision,10, 433–436.
Brown, B. (1981). Reading performance in low vision patients: Relation to contrast and contrast sensitivity.American Journal of Optometry & Physiological Optics,58, 218–226.
Bryson, B. (1995).Notes from a small island. London: Black Swan.
Campbell, F. W., & Robson, J. G. (1968). Application of Fourier analysis to the visibility of gratings.Journal of Physiology,197, 551–566.
Carr, T. H., & Pollatsek, A. (1985). Recognizing printed words: A look at current models. In D. Besner, T. G. Waller, & G. E. MacKinnon (Eds.),Reading research: Advances in theory and practice (Vol. 5, pp. 1–82). Orlando: Academic Press.
Carver, R. P. (1990).Reading rate: A review of research and theory. San Diego: Academic Press.
Chase, C. H. (1996). A visual deficit model of developmental dyslexia. In C. H. Chase, G. D. Rosen, & G. F. Sherman (Eds.),Developmental dyslexia: Neural, cognitive, and genetic mechanisms (pp. 127–156). Timonium, MD: York.
Cornelissen, P. L. (1993). Fixation, contrast sensitivity and children’s reading. In S. F. Wright & R. Groner (Eds.),Facets of dyslexia and its remediation (pp. 139–162). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Cornelissen, P. L., Hansen, P. C., Gilchrist, I. D., Cormack, F., Essex, J., &Frankish, C. (1998). Coherent motion detection and letter position encoding.Vision Research,38, 2181–2191.
Dakin, S. C., &Morgan, M. J. (1999). The role of visual cues to word shape in reading.Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science,40, S35.
Demb, J. B., Boynton, G. M., Best, M., &Heeger, D. J. (1998). Psychophysical evidence for a magnocellular pathway deficit in dyslexia.Vision Research,38, 1555–1559.
Evans, B. J. W., Drasdo, N., &Richards, I. L. (1993). Linking the sensory and motor visual correlates of dyslexia. In S. F. Wright & R. Groner (Eds.),Facets of dyslexia and its remediation (pp. 179–191). Amsterdam: Elsevier, North-Holland.
Evans, B. J. W., Drasdo, N., &Richards, I. L. (1994). An investigation of some sensory and refractive visual factors in dyslexia.Vision Research,34, 1913–1926.
Fiorentini, A., Maffei, L., &Sandini, G. (1983). The role of high spatial frequencies in face perception.Perception,12, 195–201.
Francis, W. N., &Kučera, H. (1982).Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Ginsburg, A. P. (1980). Specifying relevant spatial information for image evaluation and display design: An explanation of how we see certain objects.Proceedings of the Society for Information Display,21, 219–227.
Ginsburg, A. P. (1986). Spatial filtering and visual form perception. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.),Handbook of human perception and human performance (Vol. 2, chap. 34, pp. 1–41). New York: Wiley.
Graham, N. V. S. (1989).Visual pattern analyzers. New York: Oxford University Press.
Grainger, J., &Jacobs, A. M. (1994). A dual read-out model of word context effects in letter perception: Further investigations of the word superiority effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 1158–1176.
Grainger, J., &Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model.Psychological Review,103, 518–565.
Gross-Glenn, K., Skottun, B. C., Glenn, W., Kushch, A., Lingua, R., Dunbar, M., et al. (1995). Contrast sensitivity in dyslexia.Visual Neuroscience,12, 153–163.
Healy, A. F., Oliver, W. L., &McNamara, T. P. (1987). Detecting letters in continuous text: Effects of display size.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,13, 279–290.
Hildebrandt, N., Caplan, D., Sokol, S., &Torreano, L. (1995). Lexical factors in the word-superiority effect.Memory & Cognition,23, 23–33.
Jackson, M. D., &McClelland, J. L. (1979). Processing determinants of reading speed.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,108, 151–181.
Jacobs, A. M., &Grainger, J. (1994). Models of visual word recognition: Sampling the state of the art.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 1311–1334.
Johnston, J. C. (1978). A test of the sophisticated guessing theory of word perception.Cognitive Psychology,10, 123–153.
Johnston, J. C., &McClelland, J. L. (1980). Experimental tests of a hierarchical model of word recognition.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,19, 503–524.
Jordan, T. R. (1990). Presenting words without interior letters: Superiority over single letters and influence of postmask boundaries.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 893–909.
Jordan, T. R. (1995). Perceiving exterior letters of words: Differential influences of letter-fragment and non-letter-fragment masks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,21, 512–530.
Jordan, T. R., &Bevan, K. M. (1996). Position-specific masking and the word—letter phenomenon: Re-examining the evidence from the Reicher—Wheeler paradigm.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,22, 1416–1433.
Jordan, T. R., &de Bruijn, O. (1993). Word superiority over isolated letters: The neglected role of flanking mask contours.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 549–563.
Jordan, T. R., Patching, G. R., &Milner, A. D. (2000). Lateralized word recognition: Assessing the role of hemispheric specialization, modes of lexical access, and perceptual asymmetry.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 1192–1208.
Jordan, T. R., Patching, G. R., &Thomas, S. M. (2003a). Assessing the role of hemispheric specialisation, serial-position processing, and retinal eccentricity in lateralised word recognition.Cognitive Neuropsychology,20, 49–71.
Jordan, T. R., Patching, G. R., &Thomas, S. M. (2003b). Asymmetries and eccentricities in studies of lateralised word recognition: A response to Nazir.Cognitive Neuropsychology,20, 81–89.
Jordan, T. R., Redwood, M., &Patching, G. R. (2003). Effects of form familiarity on perception of words, pseudowords, and nonwords in the two cerebral hemispheres. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,15, 537–548.
Jordan, T. R., &Thomas, S. M. (2002). In search of perceptual influences of sentence context on word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 33–45.
Jordan, T. R., Thomas, S. M., &Patching, G. R. (2003). Assessing the importance of letter pairs in reading: Parafoveal processing is not the only view.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,29, 900–903.
Jordan, T. R., Thomas, S. M., Patching, G. R., &Scott-Brown, K. C. (2003). Assessing the importance of letter pairs in initial, exterior, and interior positions in reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,29, 883–893.
King-Smith, P. E., Grigsby, S. S., Vingrys, A. J., Benes, S. C., &Supowit, A. A. (1994). Efficient and unbiased modifications of the QUEST threshold method: Theory, simulations, experimental evaluation and practical implementation.Vision Research,34, 885–912.
Kitchin, J. E., &Bailey, I. (1981). Task complexity and visual acuity in senile macular degeneration.Australian Journal of Optometry,64, 235–242.
Krueger, L. E. (1975). The word-superiority effect: Is its locus visualspatial or verbal?Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,6, 465–468.
Leat, S. J., &Munger, R. (1994).A new application of band-pass fast Fourier transforms to the study of reading performance. In Vision science and its applications (Technical Digest Series, Vol. 2, pp. 250–253). Washington, DC: Optical Society of America.
Legge, G. E., Mansfield, J. S., &Chung, S. T. L. (2001). Psychophysics of reading: XX. Linking letter recognition to reading speed in central and peripheral vision.Vision Research,41, 725–743.
Legge, G. E., Pelli, D. G., Rubin, G. S., &Schleske, M. M. (1985). Psychophysics of reading: I. Normal vision.Vision Research,25, 239–252.
Legge, G. E., Rubin, G. S., &Luebker, A. (1987). Psychophysics of reading: V. The role of contrast in normal vision.Vision Research,27, 1165–1177.
Legge, G. E., Rubin, G. S., Pelli, D. G., & Schleske, M. M. (1985). Psychophysics of reading: II. Low vision.Vision Research,25, 253–265.
Lovegrove, W. J., Bowling, A., Badcock, D., &Blackwood, M. (1980). Specific reading disability: Differences in contrast sensitivity as a function of spatial frequency.Science,210, 439–440.
Lovegrove, W. J., Martin, F., Bowling, A., Blackwood, M., Badcock, D., &Paxton, S. (1982). Contrast sensitivity functions and specific reading disability.Neuropsychologia,20, 309–315.
Martin, A., Cornelissen, P., Fowler, S., &Stein, J. (1993). Contrast sensitivity, ocular dominance and specific reading disability.Clinical Vision Science,8, 345–353.
Martin, A., &Lovegrove, W. [J.] (1984). The effects of field size and luminance on contrast sensitivity differences between specifically disabled and normal children.Neuropsychologia,22, 73–77.
Martin, A., &Lovegrove, W. J. (1988). Uniform-field flicker masking in control and specifically-disabled readers.Perception,17, 203–214.
McClelland, J. L. (1976). Preliminary letter recognition in the perception of words and nonwords.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,2, 80–91.
McClelland, J. L., &Johnston, J. C. (1977). The role of familiar units in the perception of words and nonwords.Perception & Psychophysics,22, 249–261.
McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Pt. 1. An account of basic findings.Psychological Review,88, 375–407.
McClelland, J. L., &Rumelhart, D. E. (1988).Explorations in parallel distributed processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
O’Brien, B. A., Mansfield, J. S., &Legge, G. E. (2000). The effect of contrast on reading speed in dyslexia.Vision Research,40, 1921–1935.
Paap, K. R., Newsome, S. L., McDonald, J. E., &Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1982). An activation-verification model for letter and word recognition: The word-superiority effect.Psychological Review,89, 573–594.
Pelli, D. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies.Spatial Vision,10, 437–442.
Pelli, D. G., & Farrell, B. (1994). Psychophysical methods. In M. Bass, E. W. Van Stryland, D. R. Williams, & W. L. Wolfe (Eds.),Handbook of Optics (2nd ed., pp. 29.1–29.13). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Reeves, B. C., Wood, J. M., &Hill, A. R. (1993). Reliability of highand low-contrast letter charts.Ophthalmology & Physiological Optics,13, 17–26.
Reicher, G. M. (1969). Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus material. Journal of Experimental Psychology,81, 275–280.
Rudnicky, A. I., &Kolers, P. A. (1984). Size and case of type as stimuli in reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,10, 231–249.
Russ, J. C. (1999).The image processing handbook. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Rutter, M., &Yule, W. (1975). The concept of specific reading retardation.Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry,16, 181–197.
Schyns, P. G., & Oliva, A. (1994). From blobs to boundary edges: Evidence for time- and spatial-scale-dependent scene recognition.Psychological Science,5, 195–200.
Schyns, P. G., &Oliva, A. (1997). Flexible, diagnosticity-driven, rather than fixed, perceptually determined scale selection in scene and face recognition.Perception,26, 1027–1038.
Schyns, P. G., &Oliva, A. (1999). Dr. Angry and Mr. Smile: When categorization flexibly modifies the perception of faces in rapid visual presentations.Cognition,69, 243–265.
Skottun, B. C. (2000). The magnocellular deficit theory of dyslexia: The evidence from contrast sensitivity.Vision Research,40, 111–127.
Stein, J., &Walsh, V. (1997). To see but not to read: The magnocellular theory of dyslexia.Trends in Neurosciences,20, 147–152.
Stuart, G. W., McAnally, K. I., &Castles, A. (2001). Can contrast sensitivity functions in dyslexia be explained by inattention rather than a magnocellular deficit?Vision Research,41, 3205–3211.
Watson, A. B., & Pelli, D. G. (1983). QUEST: A Bayesian adaptive psychometric method.Perception & Psychophysics,33, 113–120.
Wheeler, D. D. (1970). Process in word recognition.Cognitive Psychology,1, 59–85.
Whittaker, S. G., &Lovie-Kitchin, J. (1993). Visual requirements for reading.Optometry & Vision Science,70, 54–65.
Winer, B. J. (1971).Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The research reported in this article was supported by Wellcome Trust Grant 059727 to T.R.J.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Patching, G.R., Jordan, T.R. Assessing the role of different spatial frequencies in word perception by good and poor readers. Memory & Cognition 33, 961–971 (2005). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193205
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193205