The left V8 plot has already begun to give meaning to the text by grouping dots, dashes, and curves into letters. The next center is of main importance to us - Visual Word Field Area, VVFA! The beginning of easy reading starts here. 🤫
VVFA is our first ROI (Region Of Interest), so I (ahem..geniusly) called it the "river box" because we look for all words here - or more precisely, we register all meanings of grouped letters here. Also, to me, the suggestion "river" nicely describes this fluid activity of the brain when reading up to and after this center (gif 2).
In a simplified way, let's look at words as the edges of small objects from our environment. So instead of drawing and coloring objects, we combine only edges to make characters, then letters, then words... Moreover, the river box is located between the neural parcels for recognizing objects, places, faces (so everything with edges) and the plus is downstream the so-called "ventral visual stream" for meaning (which answers: "What is that?"). This is the topic of the next article.
And what is the river box on the left? Well, because the language is dominant on the left side, which is also more prone to "higher resolutions". But what if we can't read? In illiterate people, this part has retained its original face recognition function. Now, does the posmen better/worse recognize faces because only the right equivalent does this function? Well, I would bet that the right one was improved because it got more faces (stimulus), help from the left V1-4 and thus improved. And maybe there are no compensations. But who knows, maybe reading directly promotes introversion xexe.
Or an even more chewed-up example is when we see a car on the street. We don't need to look at the shape, headlights, brand, steering wheel, seats, color... to determine that it is a car. Even though we can't see all the parts, our brain creates the illusion that we have seen the whole car. It means so much complexity that we would think it was a car, and our brain would create the illusion that we recognized it with one glance. Moreover, the very concept of a car refers more to function than to form. We will see that similar principles follow reading because they follow a ventral flow, their location is close...
A river box is, in anatomical terms, a huge collection of neural networks that are somewhat like word patterns. We can freely look at it figuratively as a real box containing paper templates. Let's remember that it is still about extracting the meaning from the captured image. Therefore, a word box can only group a letter-DO-letter into a word. And stencils give a 2D feel. If a word box were to group a letter-PO-letter into a word, then we would be looking for something that also has a time scale (3D; e.g. a movie). So when the eyes see a word on paper, then the subconscious mind chooses the pattern that best goes with that word. The selected pattern is sent to successive centers exactly.
Why "paper templates" and their "matching" with the words of the text? Precisely because of the aforementioned: a) they can be rewritten, b) 2D, letter-TO-letter, c) the ambiguity of words, and g) the eyes do not send 100% of the dots of the word, but must be "guessed" ie. pairs. We call that matching word RECOGNITION. From these characteristics we can draw that we can recognize well-known words without seeing each letter. Without this ability, we wouldn't be able to play that "b_shanke" game (#j_b_g_ br_t). The more experience with text, the more templates are duplicated, optimized and sharpened.
Rather, if we were to consider the space between words as a letter, would we perhaps evolve our word box into a "phrase box"? After all, by grouping words we sometimes understand much more easily what the writer wanted to say: Nikola (which Nikola? there are thousands of Nikolas) Tesla (One is Nikola Tesla). Also if we were to invert: Tesla (car, company or scientist?) Nikola (scientist...). Isn't it better to read like that? ;)
Perhaps I should also point out: recognition is not speaking. When we recognize someone's face, car, house, object... we don't have to say it to know who it is and what it's for. Also, recognition is not reading, because as I said, reading is yet to come and the river box can be stimulated subconsciously, and reading is conscious.
Figuratively speaking to improve the reading in this step - deepening the river box and widening the river course (bed?).Wordy relief
So we know that we will not practice with numbers, so we can think about which new ones to introduce based on the derived guidelines. ✊😎
So, as they say in the courses: "fly through the text" and "increase peripheral perception"? And what did I ask you: "What are they trying to do here, what do they think they are succeeding in and what do they think they are succeeding in?" Did you break in?'' So...
,,Fly through the text‟: when we move quickly through the text, we see less words, which means that we guess more, which forces us to perfect the pattern. Also, the word box is activated even when we are not aware of the word we have seen (<1/5s).
"Increase peripheral vision": words are poorly seen in peripheral vision, so when we try to recognize a word with peripheral vision, then again we need more efficient patterns for recognition.
However, we said that central vision is sharper and that we see words best in it because of the arrangement of the receptors, which cannot be changed. Here we need the first guideline, because we are told that our eyes are fascinating and to expand our field of vision. What kind of expansion of the field of view? I said that although our eyes focus imperfectly, we have the illusion of seeing the whole word at once. Well, that feeling/illusion of seeing words as if in the central field is what they mean when they say they expand the field of view/perception. It has nothing to do with the eye, but with what happens in the river box. When the word is recognized, it also seems to be seen more clearly.
Therefore, if we rush to have our peripheral vision be like the central one, which is biologically "expensive", it would be pointless. I would also say that it is useful to have this "limitation" of the peripheral field of vision. Otherwise, the work would be reduced to hard learning to filter the irrelevant pixels of images with unlimited resolutions.
VVFA is our first ROI (Region Of Interest), so I (ahem..geniusly) called it the "river box" because we look for all words here - or more precisely, we register all meanings of grouped letters here. Also, to me, the suggestion "river" nicely describes this fluid activity of the brain when reading up to and after this center (gif 2).
 |
| Gif 2. River box in action (side view of ironed left hemisphere). When the eyes see a word (consciously or not), it takes somewhere around 0.17-0.2s to detect activity in the VWFA on an fMRI scan. In the gif (sorry for qvalitt) it is the moment around 200 ms when there is the most yellow. We can say that everything is done up to 500 ms. In the literature, this activity is referred to as the ventral stream and mainly serves to give meaning, i.e. to answer the questions who? what? What is the purpose? etc... |
The fascinating thing is that it doesn't matter what language it is, what letter, written or printed, font, text size... the word box shows activity (gif 2) when the eyes see anything written that looks like a word (figure 3 ). Even more fascinating is that the activity is also seen when the words are displayed to the eyes so quickly that the reader is not aware of the word. On top of that, it's surprising that even braille (touch) activates the river box.
All this is fascinating, but what is exciting is that reading speed is positively correlated with river box activation (Figure 4). According to this, we can mark the river box as one of the steps to facilitate reading. Try to connect figures 3 and 4 from this experiment to see what I mean.
 |
Figure 3. An experiment in which the participants were shown graphic combinations of the same number of dashes, so that they were formed: a recognizable word, an unrecognizable word, an object, and an unrecognizable object (left image). Only the correct word activated the word box (right image, yellow). |
 |
Figure 4. A very valuable experiment involving 3 groups of people from one village: illiterate (never learned to read), illiterate who learned to read and literate (ie experienced readers). It is obvious that the greater the reading skill (reading speed), the greater the activity of the river box.. |
Edgy evolution
We naturally wonder where we got this ability to recognize diverse groups of 30 possible characters and thus know what the writer wanted to say? Also, how is it that one small part of the brain is so narrowly specialized to store words? The answer is not really complicated when you consider what the letters look like and in whose neighborhood the river box is located.In a simplified way, let's look at words as the edges of small objects from our environment. So instead of drawing and coloring objects, we combine only edges to make characters, then letters, then words... Moreover, the river box is located between the neural parcels for recognizing objects, places, faces (so everything with edges) and the plus is downstream the so-called "ventral visual stream" for meaning (which answers: "What is that?"). This is the topic of the next article.
And what is the river box on the left? Well, because the language is dominant on the left side, which is also more prone to "higher resolutions". But what if we can't read? In illiterate people, this part has retained its original face recognition function. Now, does the posmen better/worse recognize faces because only the right equivalent does this function? Well, I would bet that the right one was improved because it got more faces (stimulus), help from the left V1-4 and thus improved. And maybe there are no compensations. But who knows, maybe reading directly promotes introversion xexe.
Word recognition templates
The reading is predestined to be anatomical at first and then to be functional. Our eyes give us the first anatomical "limitation" because due to insufficient receptors, we get a narrow central vision that is much sharper than the extended peripheral vision. Since the eyes move with jerks that are not perfect, this means that they do not focus exactly on the middle of the word, but here and there on individual letters and around the word, so that we have the illusion of seeing the whole word at once. Let's remember children when they read in sequence and don't notice that there are units.Or an even more chewed-up example is when we see a car on the street. We don't need to look at the shape, headlights, brand, steering wheel, seats, color... to determine that it is a car. Even though we can't see all the parts, our brain creates the illusion that we have seen the whole car. It means so much complexity that we would think it was a car, and our brain would create the illusion that we recognized it with one glance. Moreover, the very concept of a car refers more to function than to form. We will see that similar principles follow reading because they follow a ventral flow, their location is close...
A river box is, in anatomical terms, a huge collection of neural networks that are somewhat like word patterns. We can freely look at it figuratively as a real box containing paper templates. Let's remember that it is still about extracting the meaning from the captured image. Therefore, a word box can only group a letter-DO-letter into a word. And stencils give a 2D feel. If a word box were to group a letter-PO-letter into a word, then we would be looking for something that also has a time scale (3D; e.g. a movie). So when the eyes see a word on paper, then the subconscious mind chooses the pattern that best goes with that word. The selected pattern is sent to successive centers exactly.
Why "paper templates" and their "matching" with the words of the text? Precisely because of the aforementioned: a) they can be rewritten, b) 2D, letter-TO-letter, c) the ambiguity of words, and g) the eyes do not send 100% of the dots of the word, but must be "guessed" ie. pairs. We call that matching word RECOGNITION. From these characteristics we can draw that we can recognize well-known words without seeing each letter. Without this ability, we wouldn't be able to play that "b_shanke" game (#j_b_g_ br_t). The more experience with text, the more templates are duplicated, optimized and sharpened.
Rather, if we were to consider the space between words as a letter, would we perhaps evolve our word box into a "phrase box"? After all, by grouping words we sometimes understand much more easily what the writer wanted to say: Nikola (which Nikola? there are thousands of Nikolas) Tesla (One is Nikola Tesla). Also if we were to invert: Tesla (car, company or scientist?) Nikola (scientist...). Isn't it better to read like that? ;)
Perhaps I should also point out: recognition is not speaking. When we recognize someone's face, car, house, object... we don't have to say it to know who it is and what it's for. Also, recognition is not reading, because as I said, reading is yet to come and the river box can be stimulated subconsciously, and reading is conscious.
Figuratively speaking to improve the reading in this step - deepening the river box and widening the river course (bed?).
Wordy relief
So we know that we will not practice with numbers, so we can think about which new ones to introduce based on the derived guidelines. ✊😎So, as they say in the courses: "fly through the text" and "increase peripheral perception"? And what did I ask you: "What are they trying to do here, what do they think they are succeeding in and what do they think they are succeeding in?" Did you break in?'' So...
Therefore, training can reduce the information for recognition by increasing the speed and decreasing the resolution. So the explanation and comments for tips:Recognize more words from as little information as possible.
,,Fly through the text‟: when we move quickly through the text, we see less words, which means that we guess more, which forces us to perfect the pattern. Also, the word box is activated even when we are not aware of the word we have seen (<1/5s).
"Increase peripheral vision": words are poorly seen in peripheral vision, so when we try to recognize a word with peripheral vision, then again we need more efficient patterns for recognition.
However, we said that central vision is sharper and that we see words best in it because of the arrangement of the receptors, which cannot be changed. Here we need the first guideline, because we are told that our eyes are fascinating and to expand our field of vision. What kind of expansion of the field of view? I said that although our eyes focus imperfectly, we have the illusion of seeing the whole word at once. Well, that feeling/illusion of seeing words as if in the central field is what they mean when they say they expand the field of view/perception. It has nothing to do with the eye, but with what happens in the river box. When the word is recognized, it also seems to be seen more clearly.
Therefore, if we rush to have our peripheral vision be like the central one, which is biologically "expensive", it would be pointless. I would also say that it is useful to have this "limitation" of the peripheral field of vision. Otherwise, the work would be reduced to hard learning to filter the irrelevant pixels of images with unlimited resolutions.
Comments
Post a Comment