Abstract

Comparison of eye movement mechanisms in natural reading with two commonly used instruments in the evaluation and/or treatment of SLD (Specific Learning Disorders): the naming of word lists (and/or pseudowords) and the naming of single word tachystoscopic projections. This critical literary revision demonstrates limitations of single-word paradigms and highlights the specific necessity of eye movements for efficient reading. New perspectives can also be demonstrated by means of eye movement tracing analysis. We propose a new hypothesis regarding both the dynamic perceptual span and the crowding of WHERE (compared to the crowding of WHAT). Therefore there is a need for a more ecological approach to the analysis of reading, based on the mechanics of eye movement found in normal adults.