The Effect of Color and Positional Noise on Reading Performance in Human Vision

Abdullah Alsalhi; Nadia  Northway; Glyn  Walsh; Abd Elaziz Mohamed  Elmadina

doi:10.3889/oamjms.2021.5729

Authors

Abdullah Alsalhi Department of Vision Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK; Department of Optometry, Qassim University, Qassim, Saudi Arabia
Nadia Northway Department of Vision Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK
Glyn Walsh Department of Vision Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK
Abd Elaziz Mohamed Elmadina Department of Optometry, Qassim University, Qassim, Saudi Arabia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2021.5729

Keywords:

Reading performance, Words recognition, Orthographic reading, Positional noise, Wavelengths

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Reading can be described as a complex cognitive process of decrypting signs to create meaning. Eventually, it is a way of language achievement, communication, and sharing information and ideas. Changing lighting and color are known to improve visual comfort and the perceptual difficulties that affect reading for those with poor vision.

AIM: This study aims to investigate the effect of changing the wavelengths and different levels of positional noise on reading performance for participants with best-corrected distant visual acuity (BCVA) of 6/6 or better.

METHODOLOGY: Twenty English speakers with BCVA 6/6 or better were asked to read words presented in a printed format. The stimuli were black print words in a horizontal arrangement on matte white card. They were degraded using positional noise produced by random vertical displacements of the letter position below or above the horizontal line on three levels.

RESULTS: Introducing positional noise affected word recognition differently with different wavelengths. The role of short wavelength in enhancing orthographic reading and word recognition is clear – they reduce the effects of positional noise. The error rate and duration time have different effects with different wavelengths, even when positional noise is introduced.

CONCLUSION: The reading rate is not affected by changing the wavelength of the light. However, the mean differences in wpm were affected by changing the wavelengths. Also, introducing positional noise affects word recognition differently with different wavelengths.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block

References

Keith R, Reichle ED. Models of the reading process: Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cogn Sci. 2010;1(6):787-99. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.68

Latisha H, Flanigan K. Developing Word Recognition. New York: Guilford Publications; 2014. p. 1-24. Availale from: https://www.guilford.com/excerpts/hayes4.pdf?t. [Last accessed on 2020 Nov 15].

Nadia N, Manahilov V, Simpson W. Coloured filters improve exclusion of perceptual noise in visually symptomatic dyslexics. J Res Reading. 2010;33(3):223-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2009.01409.x

Arcangelo U, Enna M, Mulatti C. Colors, colored overlays, and reading skills. Front Psychol. 2014;5:1-4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00833 PMId:25120525

Dennis ML, Klein SA, Chen I. What limits performance in the amblyopic visual system: Seeing signals in noise with an amblyopic brain. J Vision. 2008;8(4):1-23. https://doi.org/10.1167/8.4.1 PMId:18484840

Susana TL. The effect of letter spacing on reading speed in central and peripheral vision. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43(4):1270-6. PMId:11923275

Veronica M, Facoetti A, Zorzi M. The effect of decreased interletter spacing on orthographic processing. Psychon Bull Rev. 2015;22(3):824-32. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0728-9 PMId:25361820

Manuel P, Panadero V, Moret-Tatay C, Gómez P. The effects of inter-letter spacing in visual-word recognition: Evidence with young normal readers and developmental dyslexics. Learn Instr. 2012;22(6):420-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.04.001

Sheila AB, Kerov V. Photoreceptor Inner and Outer Segments. Curr Top Membr. 2013;72:231-65. PMId:24210432

Kolb H, Fernandez E, Nelson R. Webvision; 2012. Available from: http://www.iar.unicamp.br/lab/luz/ld/Pesquisa/webvision. pdf. [Last accessed on 2020 Nov 15]

Christina J. Human retinal circuitry and physiology. Psychol Neurosci. 2008;1(2):141-65.

Helga K. How the retina works: Much of the construction of an image takes place in the retina itself through the use of specialized neural circuits. Am Sci. 2003;91(1):28-35.

Gordon EL, Yuanchao G. Stereopsis and contrast. Vision Res. 1989;29(8):989-1004. https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(89)90114-4 PMId:2629214

Luz R, Bigham JP. Good background colours for readers: A study of people with and without dyslexia. Proceedings of the 19th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 2017. p. 72-80. https://doi.org/10.1145/3132525.3132546

Catherine MS, Lawrenson JG, Conway ML. Efficacy of coloured overlays and lenses for treating reading difficulty: An overview of systematic reviews. Clin Exp Optom. 2018;101(4):514-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/cxo.12676 PMId:29633383

Christopher C, Ashourzadeh A, Kelly C, Monfette S, Kinsey K. Can the magnocellular pathway read? Evidence from studies of color. Vision Res. 2003;43(10):1211-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0042-6989(03)00085-3 PMId:12705960

Murav’eva SV, Pronin SV, Vakhrameeva O, Shelepin Y. Comparing monocular and binocular visual acuity under noisy conditions. J Opt Technol. 2015;82(10):663-6. https://doi.org/10.1364/jot.82.000663

Stewart HC, Reid RC. The koniocellular pathway in primate vision. Ann Rev Neurosci. 2000;23(1):127-53. PMId:10845061

Damian JW, Fitzpatrick D, Kerr JN. Primate thalamus: More than meets an eye. Curr Biol. 2016;26(2):R60-1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.11.025 PMId:26811887

Bruno GB, Breier JI. Effects of background color on reaction time to stimuli varying in size and contrast: Inferences about human M channels. Vision Res. 1994;34(8):1039-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(94)90008-6 PMId:8160413

Reinhold K, Grabner E, Rolfs M, Engbert R. Length, frequency, and predictability effects of words on eye movements in reading. Eur J Cogn Psychol. 2004;16(1-2):262-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440340000213

Helena O, Näsänen R, Kojo I. Eye movements in the visual search of word lists. Vision Res. 2002;42(12):1499-512. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0042-6989(02)00077-9 PMId:12044751

Simon PT, Schroeder S. Word length and frequency effects on children’s eye movements during silent reading. Vision Res. 2015;113(Pt A):33-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2015.05.008 PMId:26048684

Gerald T, Turcotte J. Word length effects are not due to proactive interference. Memory 2000;10(2):139-49. PMId:11798443