It looks convincing because you *do* get the gist eventually, but the performance drop is actually not inconsiderable, in terms of reading time. *sigh* Not that I should be going on about this right now, really.
I think it may vary, depending on your personal reading style. I find such text, as long as it's mostly shorter words, parsable at a speed that is only marginally slower than my regular reading speed.
Yeah, but I'd like to see the differences between normal and semi-scrambled text, even in someone who reads scrambled confidently, in, say, an eye tracker.
I'm pretty sure that it wasn't really a Cambridge study. I'm really tempted to go down the hall and ask if I can put together a pilot looking at that sort of thing, but I don't know enough about interpreting results from that. It'll be one of those ideas I'll kick around in the back of my head for ages, though.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-09-29 12:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-09-29 12:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-09-29 02:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-09-29 04:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-09-29 04:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-09-29 04:43 pm (UTC)