|
|
|
|
| LEADER |
02709nam a2200469Ia 4500 |
| 001 |
10.1016-j.neuropsychologia.2021.107924 |
| 008 |
220427s2021 CNT 000 0 und d |
| 020 |
|
|
|a 00283932 (ISSN)
|
| 245 |
1 |
0 |
|a The time course of processing handwritten words: An ERP investigation
|
| 260 |
|
0 |
|b Elsevier Ltd
|c 2021
|
| 856 |
|
|
|z View Fulltext in Publisher
|u https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2021.107924
|
| 520 |
3 |
|
|a Behavioral studies have shown that the legibility of handwritten script hinders visual word recognition. Furthermore, when compared with printed words, lexical effects (e.g., word-frequency effect) are magnified for less intelligible (difficult) handwriting (Barnhart and Goldinger, 2010; Perea et al., 2016). This boost has been interpreted in terms of greater influence of top-down mechanisms during visual word recognition. In the present experiment, we registered the participants' ERPs to uncover top-down processing effects on early perceptual encoding. Participants' behavioral and EEG responses were recorded to high- and low-frequency words that varied in script's legibility (printed, easy handwritten, difficult handwritten) in a lexical decision experiment. Behavioral results replicated previous findings: word-frequency effects were larger in difficult handwriting than in easy handwritten or printed conditions. Critically, the ERP data showed an early effect of word-frequency in the N170 that was restricted to the difficult-to-read handwritten condition. These results are interpreted in terms of increased attentional deployment when the bottom-up signal is weak (difficult handwritten stimuli). This attentional boost would enhance top-down effects (e.g., lexical effects) in the early stages of visual word processing. © 2021 The Authors
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a adult
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a article
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a controlled study
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a electroencephalogram
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a ERPs
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Evoked Potentials
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a evoked response
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a female
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a handwriting
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Handwriting
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Handwritten word processing
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a human
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a human experiment
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Humans
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a male
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a pattern recognition
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Pattern Recognition, Visual
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a reading
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Reading
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a vision
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Visual Perception
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Visual word recognition
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a word processing
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a word recognition
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Carreiras, M.
|e author
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Gil-López, C.
|e author
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Gutierrez-Sigut, E.
|e author
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Perea, M.
|e author
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Vergara-Martínez, M.
|e author
|
| 773 |
|
|
|t Neuropsychologia
|
