The effects of alphabet and expertise on letter perception.

Long-standing questions in human perception concern the nature of the visual features that underlie letter recognition and the extent to which the visual processing of letters is affected by differences in alphabets and levels of viewer expertise. We examined these issues in a novel approach using a same-different judgment task on pairs of letters from the Arabic alphabet with 2 participant groups: 1 with no prior exposure to Arabic and 1 with reading proficiency. Hierarchical clustering and linear mixed-effects modeling of reaction times and accuracy provide evidence that both the specific characteristics of the alphabet and observers' previous experience with it affect how letters are perceived and visually processed. The findings of this research further our understanding of the multiple factors that affect letter perception and support the view of a visual system that dynamically adjusts its weighting of visual features as expert readers come to more efficiently and effectively discriminate the letters of the specific alphabet they are viewing. (PsycINFO Database Record

[1]  Caroline Blais,et al.  The spatio-temporal dynamics of visual letter recognition , 2009, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[2]  J. Grainger,et al.  Letter perception: from pixels to pandemonium , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[3]  Carly J. Leonard,et al.  Attentional guidance in singleton search: An examination of top-down, bottom-up, and intertrial factors , 2008 .

[4]  Jean-Luc Velay,et al.  Visual presentation of single letters activates a premotor area involved in writing , 2003, NeuroImage.

[5]  D. Hubel,et al.  Receptive fields and functional architecture of monkey striate cortex , 1968, The Journal of physiology.

[6]  A. Caramazza,et al.  From graphemes to abstract letter shapes: levels of representation in written spelling. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  Caroline Blais,et al.  Features for uppercase and lowercase letter identification , 2008 .

[8]  Sydney Levine,et al.  The Mental Representation of Human Action , 2018, Cogn. Sci..

[9]  Frédéric Gosselin,et al.  Bubbles: a technique to reveal the use of information in recognition tasks , 2001, Vision Research.

[10]  Rebecca Treiman,et al.  Similarities Among the Shapes of Writing and Their Effects on Learning. , 2011, Written language and literacy.

[11]  Miao‐kun Sun,et al.  Trends in cognitive sciences , 2012 .

[12]  M. Babcock,et al.  Perception of dynamic information in static handwritten forms. , 1988, The American journal of psychology.

[13]  Wim Fias,et al.  The mental representation of ordinal sequences is spatially organized , 2003, Cognition.

[14]  J. Velay,et al.  The influence of writing practice on letter recognition in preschool children: a comparison between handwriting and typing. , 2005, Acta psychologica.

[15]  Shinichi Nakagawa,et al.  A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed‐effects models , 2013 .

[16]  S. Palmer Vision Science : Photons to Phenomenology , 1999 .

[17]  G C Gilmore,et al.  Multidimensional letter similarity derived from recognition errors , 1979, Perception & psychophysics.

[18]  W. R. Garner,et al.  Reaction time as a measure of inter- and intraobject visual similarity: Letters of the alphabet , 1979 .

[19]  Jane Addams,et al.  Effect of Familiarity , 1907 .

[20]  Rebecca Treiman,et al.  The role of letter names in the acquisition of literacy. , 2003, Advances in child development and behavior.

[21]  K. James,et al.  When writing impairs reading: letter perception's susceptibility to motor interference. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[22]  Ruxandra Sireteanu,et al.  Perceptual learning in visual search generalizes over tasks, locations, and eyes , 2000, Vision Research.

[23]  Ulrike Hahn,et al.  Phoneme similarity and confusability , 2005 .

[24]  P. Weiss,et al.  Visuo-spatial representations of the alphabet in synaesthetes and non-synaesthetes. , 2011, Journal of neuropsychology.

[25]  K. James,et al.  Letter processing automatically recruits a sensory–motor brain network , 2006, Neuropsychologia.

[26]  Brenda Rapp,et al.  The similarity structure of distributed neural responses reveals the multiple representations of letters , 2014, NeuroImage.

[27]  D. Bub,et al.  Features for Identification of Uppercase and Lowercase Letters , 2008, Psychological science.

[28]  J M Loomis,et al.  Analysis of tactile and visual confusion matrices , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

[29]  J. Lyons CIRCULARITY, RELIABILITY, AND THE COGNITIVE PENETRABILITY OF PERCEPTION , 2011 .

[30]  K. James,et al.  The role of sensorimotor learning in the perception of letter-like forms: Tracking the causes of neural specialization for letters , 2009, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[31]  J. Gibson,et al.  A developmental study of the discrimination of letter-like forms. , 1962, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[32]  R. Baayen,et al.  Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items , 2008 .

[33]  Richard B. Ivry,et al.  How Does Language Change Perception: A Cautionary Note , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[34]  S. Dehaene,et al.  The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. , 1993 .

[35]  A. Oliva,et al.  Dr. Angry and Mr. Smile: when categorization flexibly modifies the perception of faces in rapid visual presentations , 1999, Cognition.

[36]  Shane T. Mueller,et al.  Alphabetic letter identification: effects of perceivability, similarity, and bias. , 2012, Acta psychologica.

[37]  D. Barr,et al.  Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. , 2013, Journal of memory and language.

[38]  Venu Govindaraju,et al.  Offline Arabic handwriting recognition: a survey , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[39]  G. Keren,et al.  Recognition models of alphanumeric characters. , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[40]  Michèle Fabre-Thorpe,et al.  Interaction of top-down and bottom-up processing in the fast visual analysis of natural scenes. , 2004, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[41]  D Norris,et al.  Merging information in speech recognition: Feedback is never necessary , 2000, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[42]  Ian C Simpson,et al.  A letter visual-similarity matrix for Latin-based alphabets , 2013, Behavior research methods.

[43]  Asifa Majid,et al.  The influence of memory on perception: it's not what things look like, it's what you call them. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[44]  Susana T. L. Chung,et al.  The dependence of crowding on flanker complexity and target-flanker similarity. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[45]  Connie Qun Guan,et al.  Writing strengthens orthography and alphabetic-coding strengthens phonology in learning to read Chinese , 2011 .

[46]  Howard E. Egeth,et al.  Differential effects of familiarity on judgments of sameness and difference , 1971 .

[47]  E. Gibson,et al.  Principles of Perceptual Learning and Development , 1973 .

[48]  S. Dehaene,et al.  How Learning to Read Changes the Cortical Networks for Vision and Language , 2010, Science.

[49]  S. Thompson-Schill,et al.  Conceptual Penetration of Visual Processing , 2010, Psychological science.

[50]  Robert W Proctor,et al.  Influence of category identity on letter matching: Conceptual penetration of visual processing or response competition? , 2012, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[51]  P. Malinowski,et al.  The effect of familiarity on visual-search performance: Evidence for learned basic features , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[52]  D. Bates,et al.  Linear Mixed-Effects Models using 'Eigen' and S4 , 2015 .

[53]  Fionn Murtagh,et al.  Ward’s Hierarchical Agglomerative Clustering Method: Which Algorithms Implement Ward’s Criterion? , 2011, Journal of Classification.

[54]  Wendy L. Braje,et al.  Human efficiency for recognizing 3-D objects in luminance noise , 1995, Vision Research.

[55]  P Cavanagh,et al.  Familiarity and pop-out in visual search , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

[56]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article Visual Recognition As Soon as You Know It Is There, You Know What It Is , 2022 .

[57]  Allen Allport,et al.  Visual attention , 1989 .

[58]  P. Kellman,et al.  Perceptual learning and human expertise. , 2009, Physics of life reviews.

[59]  Jonathan Grainger,et al.  Effects of number, complexity, and familiarity of flankers on crowded letter identification. , 2014, Journal of vision.

[60]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[61]  K. James,et al.  The effects of handwriting experience on functional brain development in pre-literate children , 2012, Trends in Neuroscience and Education.

[62]  D. Pelli,et al.  Feature detection and letter identification , 2006, Vision Research.

[63]  Kenneth R. Livingston,et al.  On the Interaction of Prior Knowledge and Stimulus Structure in Category Learning , 1995, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[64]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Definition , 1960, A Philosopher Looks at Sport.

[65]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: a failed theoretical dichotomy , 2012, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[66]  Qiong Zhang,et al.  The Structures of Letters and Symbols throughout Human History Are Selected to Match Those Found in Objects in Natural Scenes , 2006, The American Naturalist.

[67]  A. Caramazza,et al.  From Graphemes to Abstract Letter Shapes: Levels of Representation in Written Spelling , 1997 .

[68]  David B. Boles,et al.  An upper- and lowercase alphabetic similarity matrix, with derived generation similarity values , 1989 .

[69]  Peter A. Frensch,et al.  The Role of Information Reduction in Skill Acquisition , 1996, Cognitive Psychology.

[70]  A. Treisman,et al.  A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[71]  L O Harvey,et al.  Identification confusions among letters of the alphabet. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[72]  Z. Pylyshyn Is vision continuous with cognition? The case for cognitive impenetrability of visual perception. , 1999, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[73]  Jeremy M Wolfe,et al.  Visual Attention , 2020, Computational Models for Cognitive Vision.

[74]  Jonathan Grainger,et al.  Inverse discrimination time as a perceptual distance for alphabetic characters , 2004 .