Divided opinions on the split fovea

Andrew W. Ellis; Marc Brysbaert

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.04.030

Divided opinions on the split fovea

Andrew W. Ellis, Marc Brysbaert

Psychology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Editorial › peer-review

Abstract

We explain once again the distinction between the ‘split fovea theory’ and the ‘bilateral projection theory’, and consider the implications of the two theories for understanding the processing of centrally-fixated words and faces.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	2784-2785
Number of pages	2
Journal	Neuropsychologia
Volume	48
Issue number	9
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.04.030
Publication status	Published - Jul 2010

Keywords

VISUAL WORD RECOGNITION
EYE-MOVEMENT PATTERNS
PERCEPTUAL BIASES
INTERHEMISPHERIC-TRANSFER
CHIMERIC FACES
FIXATION
MODEL

Access to Document

10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.04.030

Cite this

@article{867cfdb63e6b44dfb3635da506f1ced7,

title = "Divided opinions on the split fovea",

abstract = "We explain once again the distinction between the {\textquoteleft}split fovea theory{\textquoteright} and the {\textquoteleft}bilateral projection theory{\textquoteright}, and consider the implications of the two theories for understanding the processing of centrally-fixated words and faces. ",

keywords = "VISUAL WORD RECOGNITION, EYE-MOVEMENT PATTERNS, PERCEPTUAL BIASES, INTERHEMISPHERIC-TRANSFER, CHIMERIC FACES, FIXATION, MODEL",

author = "Ellis, {Andrew W.} and Marc Brysbaert",

year = "2010",

month = jul,

doi = "10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.04.030",

language = "English",

volume = "48",

pages = "2784--2785",

journal = "Neuropsychologia",

issn = "0028-3932",

publisher = "Elsevier",

number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Divided opinions on the split fovea

AU - Ellis, Andrew W.

AU - Brysbaert, Marc

PY - 2010/7

Y1 - 2010/7

N2 - We explain once again the distinction between the ‘split fovea theory’ and the ‘bilateral projection theory’, and consider the implications of the two theories for understanding the processing of centrally-fixated words and faces.

AB - We explain once again the distinction between the ‘split fovea theory’ and the ‘bilateral projection theory’, and consider the implications of the two theories for understanding the processing of centrally-fixated words and faces.

KW - VISUAL WORD RECOGNITION

KW - EYE-MOVEMENT PATTERNS

KW - PERCEPTUAL BIASES

KW - INTERHEMISPHERIC-TRANSFER

KW - CHIMERIC FACES

KW - FIXATION

KW - MODEL

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77954538839&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.04.030

DO - 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.04.030

M3 - Editorial

SN - 0028-3932

VL - 48

SP - 2784

EP - 2785

JO - Neuropsychologia

JF - Neuropsychologia

IS - 9

ER -

Divided opinions on the split fovea

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

RTN LAB, Research Train N/Work of Language & Brain

Cite this

Divided opinions on the split fovea

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Projects

RTN LAB, Research Train N/Work of Language & Brain

Cite this