Spatial Attention as a Necessary Preliminary to Early Processes in Reading.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One major theory of the relation between spatial attention and visual word recognition holds that the former is a necessary condition for the latter to begin. A different major theory asserts that although spatial attention can facilitate the latter, it is not a necessary condition. These two theories were pitted against each other experimentally. Spatial attention was operationalized in terms of the effect of a spatial precue on the time to name a target word that appeared above or below fixation. A masked prime word was presented before the target. The critical difference between experiments was cue validity (50% in Experiments 1a and 2a and 100% in Experiments 1b and 2b). Repetition priming was observed when the prime appeared in the uncued prime location in Experiments la and 2a but not in Experiments 1b or 2b. These results are inconsistent with the claim that visual word recognition does not depend on spatial attention. Discussion centres on the distribution of spatial attention across target locations as a function of cue validity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it