The four-way interaction between cue, group, display type and difficulty was significant, with group differences largest for uncued crowded stimuli¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q2·i3large
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i3 The four-way interaction between cue, group, display type and difficulty was significant, indicating that performance of AwD and controls differed more when stimuli were uncued and crowded. → Moores 2011
Evidence¶
Moores 2011¶
Moores, E., Cassim, R. and Talcott, J.B. (2011). Adults with dyslexia exhibit large effects of crowding, increased dependence on cues, and detrimental effects of distractors in visual search tasks. Frontiers in Psychology. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.10.005
q2 · i3 · causal · r2
Four-factor ANOVA on crowding-analysis accuracy (set size eight spread vs crowded, uncued vs pre-cued, easy vs difficult) for 15 AwD and 16 controls. Significant cue-group, cue-display and cue-display-group interactions (η2p =.23, .26, .15) indicated group differences were largest for uncued crowded displays.
"There were also significant interactions of cue and group (F1, 29=8.85, p<.01, η2p =.23); cue and display type (F1, 29=10.36, p<.01, η2p =.26); and cue, display type and group (F1, 29=5.03, p<.05, η2p =.15). These findings suggested that performance of AwD and controls differed more when stimuli were uncued and crowded."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Crowding effects, pre-cue dependence and set size effects each correlate significantly with reading and spelling measures — related
- Adults with dyslexia show disproportionately reduced discrimination accuracy in crowded displays compared to controls — related
- AwD required significantly longer calibrated display durations than controls despite attempts to equate overall accuracy — related
- Adults with dyslexia use pre-cues to enhance discrimination accuracy, with pre-cued performance exceeding both post-cued and uncued conditions — related
- AwD showed significant set size effects in uncued conditions alongside difficulty effects, unlike controls — related
- Pre-cues and post-cues eliminate set size effects for controls but not for adults with dyslexia — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
four-way-cue-group-display-difficulty-interaction |
title |
The four-way interaction between cue, group, display type and difficulty was significant, with group differences largest for uncued crowded stimuli |
description |
The four-way interaction between cue, group, display type and difficulty was significant, with group differences largest for uncued crowded stimuli |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2011 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — moores-2011 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.