<p>The average response times for single words in a lexical decision task (depart real words from nonsense words) is plotted below. </p>

<p>The curve follows a <strong>U-shape and span over several dozens of milliseconds</strong>.</p>

<p><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/Fo5eB.png" alt="enter image description here"></p>

<p>Figure 2. Average reaction time and 95% confidence interval for words with lengths from 3 to 13 letters if length was the only factor having an influence (all other factors have been partialled out).</p>

<p><em>Ref</em>: New et al., PBR (2006). <a href="http://digirep.rhul.ac.uk/file/5b9f8c0a-8b02-1bda-36cb-e07ac5dd3c90/5/45_New%2520et%2520al%2520PBR%2520length.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Reexamining the word length effect in visual word recognition: New evidence from the English Lexicon Project</a></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-02-06T21:17:37.327Z
@what I understand your point. We could also argue that the naming task reflects more the naming part than the reading one.
marsei
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-02-07T09:16:10.030Z
@what in my view, a word can be seen either as a visual object with linguistic properties (studied in lexical decision) or as a linguistic object with visual properties (studied in naming). Both approaches refer to words and reading. In the case of a lexical decision, the reading ability reflects more the visual recognition part of reading, while naming (i.e. reading aloud) emphases the phonological/articulatory part of reading. In this light, there is a word length effect in (the visual part of) reading but this effect don't show up a naming task. My guess is that we could agree on this, no?
marsei
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-02-06T12:51:14.737Z
2014-02-06T12:51:14.737Z
marsei
<p>I recently installed a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_reading" rel="nofollow noreferrer">speed reader</a> on my tablet. Now I wonder how the minimal time needed to read an $N$-letter word grows.</p>

<p>There was this previous question on <a href="https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/questions/1147/how-long-does-it-take-to-read-x-number-of-characters">the relationship between sentence length and reading time.</a> However, I'm particularly interested in the relationship between word length and reading specific words.</p>

<p><strong>Does the time required to read an $N$-letter word grow linearly?</strong></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-02-06T06:07:18.970Z
I think this is a duplicate of [How long does it take to read X number of characters?](http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/questions/1147/how-long-does-it-take-to-read-x-number-of-characters). That question specifically discusses linear, versus sub-linear, versus super-linear growth.
Artem Kaznatcheev
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-02-06T06:36:38.737Z
I think the previous question was focussed on reading sentences and this one tended to have an emphasis on words, which I think is a small but relevant difference. I've tweaked both to hopefully prevent this one being closed as a duplicate.
Jeromy Anglim
<perception><performance><reading>
Does the time required to read a word grow linearly with the number of characters?
draks ...
# Does the time required to read a word grow linearly with the number of characters?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2014-02-05)

I recently installed a [speed reader](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_reading) on my tablet. Now I wonder how the minimal time needed to read an $N$-letter word grows.

There was this previous question on [the relationship between sentence length and reading time.](https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/questions/1147/how-long-does-it-take-to-read-x-number-of-characters) However, I'm particularly interested in the relationship between word length and reading specific words.

**Does the time required to read an $N$-letter word grow linearly?**

**Tags:** perception, performance, reading

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I think this is a duplicate of [How long does it take to read X number of characters?](http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/questions/1147/how-long-does-it-take-to-read-x-number-of-characters). That question specifically discusses linear, versus sub-linear, versus super-linear growth.  
> **username_2**: I think the previous question was focussed on reading sentences and this one tended to have an emphasis on words, which I think is a small but relevant difference. I've tweaked both to hopefully prevent this one being closed as a duplicate.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2014-02-06. Score: 1 | Accepted answer

The average response times for single words in a lexical decision task (depart real words from nonsense words) is plotted below.

The curve follows a **U-shape and span over several dozens of milliseconds**.

![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/Fo5eB.png)

Figure 2. Average reaction time and 95% confidence interval for words with lengths from 3 to 13 letters if length was the only factor having an influence (all other factors have been partialled out).

*Ref*: New et al., PBR (2006). [Reexamining the word length effect in visual word recognition: New evidence from the English Lexicon Project](http://digirep.rhul.ac.uk/file/5b9f8c0a-8b02-1bda-36cb-e07ac5dd3c90/5/45_New%2520et%2520al%2520PBR%2520length.pdf)

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: @what I understand your point. We could also argue that the naming task reflects more the naming part than the reading one.  
> **username_3**: @what in my view, a word can be seen either as a visual object with linguistic properties (studied in lexical decision) or as a linguistic object with visual properties (studied in naming). Both approaches refer to words and reading. In the case of a lexical decision, the reading ability reflects more the visual recognition part of reading, while naming (i.e. reading aloud) emphases the phonological/articulatory part of reading. In this light, there is a word length effect in (the visual part of) reading but this effect don't show up a naming task. My guess is that we could agree on this, no?  

---

