Graphic complexity in writing systems.

Cultural evolution Graphic complexity Laterality Letters Visual complexity Writing systems

Journal

Cognition
ISSN: 1873-7838
Titre abrégé: Cognition
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 0367541

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
09 2021
Historique:
received: 08 12 2020
revised: 08 05 2021
accepted: 10 05 2021
pubmed: 26 5 2021
medline: 3 9 2021
entrez: 25 5 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

A writing system is a graphic code, i.e., a system of standardized pairings between symbols and meanings in which symbols take the form of images that can endure. The visual character of writing implies that written characters have to fit constraints of the human visual system. One aspect of this optimization lays in the graphic complexity of the characters used by scripts. Scripts are sets of graphic characters used for the written form of one language or more. Using computational methods over a large and diverse dataset (over 47,000 characters, from over 133 scripts), we answer three central questions about the visual complexity of written characters and the evolution of writing: (1) What determines character complexity? (2) Can we find traces of evolutionary change in character complexity? (3) Is complexity distributed in a way that makes character recognition easier? Our study suggests that (1) character complexity depends primarily on which linguistic unit the characters encode, and that (2) there is little evidence of evolutionary change in character complexity. Additionally (3) for an individual character, the half which is encountered first while reading tends to be more complex than that which is encountered last.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34034009
pii: S0010-0277(21)00190-6
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104771
pmc: PMC8346946
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

104771

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Références

Psychol Sci. 2004 Feb;15(2):106-11
pubmed: 14738517
Top Cogn Sci. 2020 Apr;12(2):727-743
pubmed: 30306732
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2007 Sep;60(9):1265-74
pubmed: 17676557
Cogn Sci. 2007 Nov 12;31(6):961-87
pubmed: 21635324
Writ Lang Lit. 2011;14(1):39-57
pubmed: 21892341
Vision Res. 2012 Aug 1;66:31-8
pubmed: 22750543
Psychol Bull. 1956 Nov;53(6):452-71
pubmed: 13370691
Cogn Sci. 2015 Jan;39(1):171-83
pubmed: 25039798
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2012 Jan;139(1):19-37
pubmed: 22036587
Child Dev. 2003 Jan-Feb;74(1):27-47
pubmed: 12625434
Neuropsychologia. 2010 Aug;48(10):2852-60
pubmed: 20546763
Proc Biol Sci. 2005 Feb 7;272(1560):267-75
pubmed: 15705551
Cortex. 2018 Jun;103:302-315
pubmed: 29684750
Neuropsychology. 2012 Sep;26(5):551-67
pubmed: 22731609
J Vis. 2014 Nov 10;14(6):
pubmed: 25384390
J Vis. 2011 Jul 05;11(8):
pubmed: 21730225
Cogn Sci. 2018 Mar;42(2):664-677
pubmed: 29023934
Psychol Bull. 2006 Jan;132(1):73-97
pubmed: 16435958
Cogn Psychol. 2010 Aug;61(1):23-62
pubmed: 20434141
Am Nat. 2006 May;167(5):E117-39
pubmed: 16671005
J Exp Child Psychol. 2018 Jun;170:207-214
pubmed: 29472110
J Exp Child Psychol. 2019 Jun;182:18-37
pubmed: 30782560
Psychol Sci. 2014 Sep;25(9):1757-67
pubmed: 25085866
Percept Psychophys. 1981 Nov;30(5):483-91
pubmed: 7329766
Vision Res. 2006 Dec;46(28):4646-74
pubmed: 16808957
Nat Hum Behav. 2017 Sep;1(9):657-664
pubmed: 31024135
PLoS One. 2019 Aug 7;14(8):e0220793
pubmed: 31390374
J Exp Child Psychol. 2013 Jun;115(2):356-70
pubmed: 23584491
J Gen Psychol. 2019 Jan-Mar;146(1):34-49
pubmed: 30632925
Behav Res Methods. 2018 Feb;50(1):427-449
pubmed: 28425059
Nature. 1977 Oct 20;269(5630):705-7
pubmed: 593332
Psychol Sci. 2015 Dec;26(12):1887-97
pubmed: 26525074
Cortex. 2011 Jun;47(6):759-62
pubmed: 21377665
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2017 Aug;70(8):1559-1574
pubmed: 27223256
PLoS One. 2018 Apr 2;13(4):e0194405
pubmed: 29608570
Science. 2015 Dec 11;350(6266):1332-8
pubmed: 26659050
Neuron. 2007 Oct 25;56(2):384-98
pubmed: 17964253
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007 May;48(5):2383-90
pubmed: 17460306
Psychol Sci. 2009 Apr;20(4):455-63
pubmed: 19399974

Auteurs

Helena Miton (H)

Santa Fe Institute, 1399 Hyde Park Road, Santa Fe, NM 87501, USA; Minds and Traditions Research Group, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena, Germany. Electronic address: helena.miton@gmail.com.

Olivier Morin (O)

Institut Jean Nicod, Département d'études cognitives, ENS, EHESS, CNRS, PSL University, UMR 8129, France; Minds and Traditions Research Group, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena, Germany.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH