Fillers and spaces in text: The importance of word recognition during reading

Abstract

Current theories of reading eye movements claim that reading saccades are programmed primarily on the basis of information about the length of the upcoming word, determined by low-level visual processes that detect spaces to the right of fixation. Many studies attempted to test this claim by filling spaces between words with various non-space symbols (fillers). This manipulation, however, confounds the effect of inserting extraneous characters into text with the effect of obscuring word boundaries by filling spaces. We performed the control conditions necessary to unconfound these effects. Skilled readers read continuous stories aloud and silently. Three factors were varied: (i) position of the fillers in the text (at the beginning, the end, or surrounding each word); (ii) the presence or absence of spaces in the text; and (iii) the effect of the type of filler on word recognition (from greatest effect to least effect: Latin letters, Greek letters, digits and shaded boxes). The effect of fillers on reading depended more on the type of filler than on the presence of spaces. The greater effect the fillers had on word recognition, the more they showed reading. Surrounding each word with digits or Greek letters slowed reading as much as filling spaces with these symbols. Surrounding each word with randomly chosen letters, while preserving spaces, slowed reading by 44-75%--as much as, or more than, removing spaces from normal text. Removing spaces from text with Latin-letter fillers slowed reading by only 10-20% more. We conclude that fillers in text disrupt reading by affecting word recognition directly, without necessarily affecting the eye movement pattern.

Font size modulates saccade-target selection in Chinese reading

“…The spaces between words in alphabetic scripts provide exactly this information. Removing space information not only reduces reading speed significantly (Epelboim, Booth, Ashkenazy, Taleghani, & Steinman, 1997;Epelboim, Booth, & Steinman, 1994;Rayner et al, 1998;Rayner & Pollatsek, 1996), but more importantly, the PVL curve decreases sharply and linearly from the beginning to the end of the word, because it presumably impedes the identification of the beginning and end of a given word which is necessary to delineate the saccade target (Rayner et al, 1998;Rayner & Pollatsek, 1996).…”

To camelcase or under_score

“…However, natural language research in psychology suggests that this is the wrong choice. For example, a study by Epelboim et al [6] considered the effect of the type of space filler on word recognition. They found that replacing spaces with Latin letters, Greek letters, or digits had a negative impact on reading.…”

“…Current theories of eye movements while reading assert that reading saccades (essentially where the eye lands when one is reading) are programmed primarily on the basis of information about the length of the upcoming word. This is determined by lowlevel visual processes that detect spaces to the right of fixation point [6].…”

An Eye Tracking Study on camelCase and under_score Identifier Styles

“…In psychology research, Epelboim et al [12] conducted a study on the effect fillers have on reading time. Spaces between words are filled with different fillers: Latin and Greek letters, digits and shaded boxes.…”

“…The main task of the study remains the same as Binkley's, which is to pick the correct identifier from a group of four closely related, although different, identifier names. Results from eye tracking studies done in the domain of cognitive psychology [12,21] on reading un-spaced text imply that camel-cased identifiers should be more difficult to read compared to underscored identifiers. We believe that replicating the experiment using an eye tracker will add to the empirical evidence as to which style is faster and more accurate for comprehension.…”