Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Tracking the Effects of Eccentricity on the Integration of Orthographic Information From Multiple Words Cover

Tracking the Effects of Eccentricity on the Integration of Orthographic Information From Multiple Words

Open Access
|Apr 2025

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Depicting of the distribution of four-letter word stimuli (flankers and target) across nine eccentricity gaps. At the initial gap, the center of the flanker string was positioned at 1.65° of visual angle from the target string center. Subsequently, each eccentricity was located approximately one space further away from the target string center. At the final gap, the flanker string was positioned at 4.29° of visual angle from the center of the target string.

Figure 2

Illustration of the experimental procedure with an example of the related conditions. The central fixation dot is used as a stimulus trigger while waiting for the participant’s gaze to land. As soon as the gaze is detected, the stimulus, consisting of the target flanked by the related words located at an eccentricity of 2.64°, is displayed for a very brief period of 170 ms. The participant’s response is expected within 4000 ms and is collected via the keyboard: p for words and q for pseudowords.

Table 1

Mean RTs (in milliseconds), accuracy (probabilities) for word targets (Standard deviations in parentheses) and delta (unrelated–related) are provided for each of the experimental conditions.

FLANKERS ECCENTRITY (DEGREES)RTS/RELATEDNESSACCURACY/RELATEDNESS
RELATEDUNRELATEDΔ (SIGNIF.)RELATEDUNRELATEDΔ (SIGNIF.)
1.65°576 (74)642 (66)66***.97 (.06).94 (.09)–.03**
1.98°586 (70)624 (63)38***.95 (.07).93 (.10)–.02 ns
2.31°580 (68)617 (60)37***.95 (.09).93 (.09)–.02 ns
2.64°582 (69)613 (71)31***.95 (.07).94 (.08)–.01 ns
2.97°586 (73)612 (70)26***.95 (.08).93 (.09)–.02 ns
3.30°573 (68)601 (69)28***.96 (.07).93 (.09)–.03 ^
3.63°579 (66)596 (67)17 **.96 (.07).95 (.08)–.01 ns
3.96°574 (69)598 (70)24***.94 (.08).93 (.10)–.01 ns
4.29°574 (65)605 (72)31***.96 (.08).94 (.09)–.02 ns

[i] Notes. Delta (Δ) represents for the relatedness effects (unrelated–related). Accuracy rates and RTs significance values were calculated from a no-intercept model specified as following: accuracy/log10(RT) ~ 0 + relatedness:eccentricity + (relatedness|subject) + (relatedness|item).

Significance levels: ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05, ^p < .10 and nsp > .10.

Figure 3

Base-10 logarithmic RTs across eccentricity in both the related (grey) and the unrelated (black) conditions. Lines represent for linear and quadratic prediction values and points for observed data. Error bars are the within-participant 95% Confidence intervals (Cousineau & O’Brian, 2014).

List of target words and unrelated flankers (set of high-frequency words).

TARGET WORDUNRELATED FLANKERTARGET WORDUNRELATED FLANKERTARGET WORDUNRELATED FLANKER
ademrotsheksbladordezeep
alletruchondmaalparkgeil
autoloonhoogveldpersbouw
bergklophuispechplekgrot
bootlivehulpvlagplusknie
bordmuisjongsirepondblut
brilmuntjouwtankpuntnood
bronstafjuryroosrampmode
buiknestkampwestreisdoei
clubverfkasttruiringknal
codelampkeerzandslagruil
dameknopkindversslotaard
deursoepkistborgsnapgolf
diefblokklapgidsstadbeet
dierofzoklokbuitstofezel
doenwijflaagpoenteefluxe
echtliedleukrandtentpols
eeuwzoetlijfklemtijdwolf
enigriemlijnzouttoengeur
eromlinkmeidtapetonghemd
etenplatmelkzonetuinstam
fijnhaltmijnkaasvlugwond
flatleedmoedpijpvoetstok
flesbondnaamrozevoorstal
fotodaadneefcomavuilgene
gastboerneustuigwerkvies
gavefrisnietlordwildduim
geenhoutnochzuurzelfjoch
glaswietoliehelmzoongras
goudfaseopendoofzwakgrof

List of target words and unrelated flankers (set of low-frequency words).

TARGET WORDUNRELATED FLANKERTARGET WORDUNRELATED FLANKERTARGET WORDUNRELATED FLANKER
baatlierkrukbieppuiktred
balkspilkuiszoemrundnipt
beukmintkurkzeefslaktrog
biebklipkwalpeessluwdeck
bijltubalaanokersmakberm
bokswurmladekolfsneudrup
boogmalsloerwratsnoredel
buurknollompwaassnotmime
darmenenluidhoesspinkaap
doekplugmankteugspitgrom
doopreukmastbresstekhoon
duifpensmeelviltstiporka
dumpkiermestlaksstrokiwi
galghielmildbrulstugjive
gansvetemiltzoolvaattros
gipskaftmoeslauwvonkaula
harkföhnmuilknorvouwknel
heupfoeinaadloofwaakleus
jeukrietnormgespwaangnoe
kalfboutoberforswerfjudo
klikdauwovenzeugzalfbonk
knikharspeilhorkzoengril
knuswelppoothels
krasmergpropkiem

[i] *-The target words that achieved an accuracy rate of less than 70% were the following: alom, ambt, cast, clou, doch, doeg, dunk, fern, fuif, hens, huls, loge, nors, pact, pief, poel, ruis, sein, smid, vrek.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.446 | Journal eISSN: 2514-4820
Language: English
Submitted on: Nov 28, 2024
Accepted on: Apr 15, 2025
Published on: Apr 28, 2025
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2025 Christophe Cauchi, Martijn Meeter, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.