Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Word and line bisection in typical and impaired readers and a cross-language comparison

  • Yafit Gabay
  • , Shai Gabay
  • , Avishai Henik
  • , Rachel Schiff
  • , Marlene Behrmann
  • Carnegie Mellon University
  • University of Haifa
  • Ben-Gurion University of the Negev

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

8 Scopus citations

Abstract

Observers exhibit larger leftward bias when bisecting words compared with lines. According to the Attentional Scaling Hypothesis, attempting to access lexical entries involves focusing attention on the initial letters of words to establish a cohort of potential matches with entries in the mental lexicon. We test this account by examining two predictions: (1) greater leftward bias for words should be evident in English readers in which the word beginning is on the left but not in Hebrew readers. (2) Dyslexics who have lexical impairments should show greater bias. Results reveal that word length modulated bisection bias differently for Hebrew and English readers, although the bias stays always leftward. Furthermore, dyslexics exhibited an exaggerated leftward bias than controls. We propose this effect arises from an interaction between reading and spatial attention rather than from the scaling of attention relative to the beginning of the word in the service of lexical access.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)143-152
Number of pages10
JournalBrain and Language
Volume150
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Nov 2015

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2015.

Funding

This research was supported by grants to MB from the National Science Foundation #SBE-0542013 (Garrison W. Cottrell, PI) and #BCS-1354350 (Marlene Behrmann, PI).

FundersFunder number
National Science Foundation-1354350

    Keywords

    • Bisection
    • Hemi-spatial attention
    • Lexical processing
    • Reading direction
    • Word representation

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Word and line bisection in typical and impaired readers and a cross-language comparison'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this