Montegut M J, Bridgeman B, Sykes J
Program in Experimental Psychology, University of California, Santa Cruz 95064, USA.
Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):305-22. doi: 10.1163/156856897x00230.
Reading from a video display terminal (VDT) was tested at screen refresh rates of 500 Hz and 60 Hz. Reading was initially 8 words/min (3.05%) faster at 500 Hz. A hypothesis that reading rate on VDTs is limited by stimulus availability accounts for the difference. When the eye reaches a new fixation position, it 'parks' until a sample of text appears at the fovea. Then processing resumes in the normal way. This idea, combined with the 500-Hz reading data, can predict reading rate at any refresh rate, and is quantitatively confirmed by the reading rate at 60 Hz. The difference in reading rates disappeared for the second half of the text, as a result of differences between frequencies of eye movements in the two refresh conditions. From the first half to the second, subjects at 60 Hz made more large forward saccades and fewer small reverse saccades. Both changes make sampling of the text more sparse, compensating for the dead time between samples. Subjects were unaware of refresh conditions, differences in their reading rates, and types of eye movements they generated. Reading from a continuously illuminated active-matrix display is slightly faster than from a comparable VDT.
在500赫兹和60赫兹的屏幕刷新率下对从视频显示终端（VDT）上阅读进行了测试。最初在500赫兹时阅读速度快8个单词/分钟（3.05%）。一种关于VDT上阅读速度受刺激可用性限制的假设解释了这种差异。当眼睛到达一个新的注视位置时，它会“停留”，直到一小段文本出现在中央凹处。然后以正常方式恢复处理。这个想法，结合500赫兹的阅读数据，可以预测任何刷新率下的阅读速度，并且在60赫兹的阅读速度下得到了定量证实。由于两种刷新率条件下眼球运动频率的差异，文本后半部分的阅读速度差异消失了。从文本前半部分到后半部分，60赫兹条件下的受试者进行了更多的大的向前扫视和更少的小的向后扫视。这两种变化都使文本采样更加稀疏，弥补了样本之间的停滞时间。受试者没有意识到刷新率条件、他们阅读速度的差异以及他们产生的眼球运动类型。从持续点亮的有源矩阵显示器上阅读比从类似的VDT上阅读略快。
