Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-28 Cooperative journals: 《心理科学进展》
Abstract： Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) is an important predictor of reading. However, why and how RAN predicts reading remains controversial. Some researchers believe that the essence of reading is to recognize individual words in text in rapid succession, Individual word recognition rate can predict the fluency of sequential text reading through phonological awareness, orthography and processing speed. Therefore, individual word processing efficiency dominated the effect of RAN on reading. Other studies have found that Single word reading efficiency cannot fully explain individual differences in the process of serial reading. readers process multiple words during fluent reading in a "cascade" of processing, which is why RAN predicts reading. Therefore, There is no consensus on the mechanism by which RAN predicts reading. This paper analyzes existing studies and finds that they have not focused on the moderating effect of Visual Attention Span (VAS) on lexical processing, which may lead to inconsistent conclusions on the underlying mechanism of RAN in predicting reading. Readers with low VAS level recognized a limited number of orthographic units and read individual words one by one in discrete form during reading, so the relationship between RAN and reading was dominated by individual word processing efficiency; Readers with high VAS regard words as a whole unit and carry out parallel processing among multiple words in sequence. This "cascade" processing dominates the relationship between RAN and reading. However, due to the stable correlation between RAN and reading, many researchers extend the efficiency of single word processing to continuous text reading, believing that reading is the rapid and automatic reading of single words in succession. The researchers did not notice that in early reading, the reader's discrete RAN was closely correlated with the serial RAN, and that in serial reading, the reader was also engaged in rapid single-word reading. In adulthood, the reader's discrete RAN is independent of the serial RAN, and discrete and serial reading are not the same. Although some researchers noticed this later, but they still did not further pay attention to the fact that the lexical processing modes of readers at different stages correspond to different levels of VAS. With the potential changes of readers' VAS, their continuous reading modes are also changing. In addition, the selected subjects in previous studies were screened for basic reading ability, They all have basic reading skills. RAN materials were all high-frequency words or words with short characters, The VAS of the subjects was sufficient to support the “sight word reading” of these high-frequency short words. Therefore, although the subjects had different levels of VAS, they were similar in reading performance. By analyzing existing studies, we found that the level of readers' VAS seemed to explain the discrepancy in the conclusions on the relationship between RAN and reading. Future studies should focus on individual differences in VAS during reading, organically integrate different theories, and further explore the relationship between RAN and reading as well as the influence of VAS at different levels on it. To improve the reasons for RAN prediction of reading and related theories, Enriching the theory of nonverbal interventions for developmental dyslexia.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-27 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： The forward testing effect describes how testing previously learned material could improve participants long-term memory for later learning of new material when continuously exposed to various information. This has been verified using different language materials. However, the effect of forward testing on spatial path learning requires further study. This study selected 112 participants randomly and conducted two experiments to explore the forward test effect of visuospatial route learning in different directions in the same scene (Experiment 1). Further, it investigated the forward test effect of visuospatial route learning in various settings (Experiment 2). The spatial route information memory method was adopted based on the extensive experimental procedure formed by the forward test effect. Through a sequence of sites in a virtual route setting, participants were required to comprehend and recollect the structures that passed on the route. Furthermore, the exercise ended with a sequential recall test. A total of 52 participants were randomly assigned to the test and repeated study groups in Experiment 1. Eight common landmark buildings, such as hospitals and schools, were selected to form four different route information. After learning approximately 1~3 pieces of route information, the repeated study group re-learned the route information. Further, the test group recalled the order of the buildings passing through the route information as required. When learning about Route 4 regarding either the test condition or the re-learn condition, it was necessary to recall the order in which the route passed through buildings. The forward test effect of memorizing route information in different scenarios was explored in Experiment 2 with 60 participants. Unlike Experiment 1, the participants in Experiment 2 learned four different routes, each containing a different building. The experimental procedure was the same as that used in Experiment 1. Experiment 1 showed that the recall accuracy of spatial path information in the test group was significantly higher than in that the repeated-learning group. Moreover, the active interference generated when recalling the fourth path information was considerably lower than that in the repeated-learning group. The results of Experiment 2 showed that there was a positive test effect for different scene background information. This further proves that the application background of the forward test effect in route-information learning was extensive. More importantly, by comparing the two experimental results horizontally, it was found that different interference levels of previous information have different effects on learning following new information. This is manifested in the difference in the interference rate caused by the difficulty of “isolation” among materials, including the trend that the correct rate decreases when the interference rate increases and the correct rate increases when the interference rate decreases. All of these directly reveal the forward direction-the importance of counteracting proactive interference in testing the effects. In summary, this study verified the existence of the forward test effect in the path learning of different directions in the same scene and the path learning in various settings. Extending the study of the forward testing effect on learning visuospatial path information will enrich the exploration of the forward testing effect in spatial memory. Additionally, this study found that different levels of interference from previously learned information affect the subsequent learning of new information. The findings provide direct experimental evidence for proactive interference reduction theory.
submitted time 2023-03-25 Cooperative journals: 《心理科学进展》
Abstract： Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) is an important predictor of reading. However, why and how RAN predicts reading remains controversial. Some researchers believe that the essence of reading is to recognize individual words in text in rapid succession, Individual word recognition rate can predict the fluency of sequential text reading through phonological awareness, orthography and processing speed. Therefore, individual word processing efficiency dominated the effect of RAN on reading. Other studies have found that Single word reading efficiency cannot fully explain individual differences in the process of serial reading. readers process multiple words during fluent reading in a "cascade" of processing, which is why RAN predicts reading. Therefore, There is no consensus on the mechanism by which RAN predicts reading. This paper analyzes existing studies and finds that they have not focused on the moderating effect of Visual Attention Span (VAS) on lexical processing, which may lead to inconsistent conclusions on the underlying mechanism of RAN in predicting reading. Readers with low VAS level recognized a limited number of orthographic units and read individual words one by one in discrete form during reading, so the relationship between RAN and reading was dominated by individual word processing efficiency; Readers with high VAS regard words as a whole unit and carry out parallel processing among multiple words in sequence. This "cascade" processing dominates the relationship between RAN and reading. However, due to the stable correlation between RAN and reading, many researchers extend the efficiency of single word processing to continuous text reading, believing that reading is the rapid and automatic reading of single words in succession. The researchers did not notice that in early reading, the reader's discrete RAN was closely correlated with the serial RAN, and that in serial reading, the reader was also engaged in rapid single-word reading. In adulthood, the reader's discrete RAN is independent of the serial RAN, and discrete and serial reading are not the same. Although some researchers noticed this later, but they still did not further pay attention to the fact that the lexical processing modes of readers at different stages correspond to different levels of VAS. With the potential changes of readers' VAS, their continuous reading modes are also changing. In addition, the selected subjects in previous studies were screened for basic reading ability, They all have basic reading skills. RAN materials were all high-frequency words or words with short characters, The VAS of the subjects was sufficient to support the “sight word reading” of these high-frequency short words. Therefore, although the subjects had different levels of VAS, they were similar in reading performance. By analyzing existing studies, we found that the level of readers' VAS seemed to explain the discrepancy in the conclusions on the relationship between RAN and reading. Future studies should focus on individual differences in VAS during reading, organically integrate different theories, and further explore the relationship between RAN and reading as well as the influence of VAS at different levels on it. To improve the reasons for RAN prediction of reading and related theories, Enriching the theory of nonverbal interventions for developmental dyslexia.
Hits
Hits
Downloads
Comment