Lexical word processing is unaffected by rapid invisible frequency tagging in reading: Evidence from eye movements

The aim of this study was to test whether rapid invisible frequency tagging (RIFT)-a promising tool to directly measure covert attention allocated to parafoveal words-affects lexical processing during natural reading. RIFT involves flickering the background of the target word(s) at an imperceptible frequency (≥60 Hz), but imperceptibility does not necessarily equate to the absence of a cognitive effect. The current study examined the potential impact of the RIFT paradigm on eye movements. Forty-eight participants read 474 high-frequency and low-frequency target words that were embedded in one-line sentences and displayed randomly in three condition blocks: no tagging, invisible tagging at 60 Hz (i.e., the RIFT) and visible tagging at 30 Hz. Linear mixed-effect modelling and divergence point analysis revealed a robust frequency effect, with high-frequency words processed faster than low-frequency words, but, crucially, no significant differences across the three conditions in terms of its magnitude or onset latency, except for a miniscule effect on saccade amplitude (0.06˚). Overall fixation durations (irrespective of lexical frequency) did not differ between the no-tagging and RIFT conditions, but were significantly longer in the visible tagging condition, suggesting that deliberately drawing attention to the tagging area actually slowed down reading. Furthermore, a postexperiment questionnaire indicated relatively low RIFT awareness. Altogether, preserved lexical frequency effects of comparable magnitude, similar divergence points and overall fixation and saccade patterns, suggest that RIFT is a valid tool for measuring attention during reading that is unlikely to interfere with word processing and highlight its potential for application in ecologically valid settings involving eye movements.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
Published
2026-06-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-026-02948-x
Primary Topic
Reading and Literacy Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Lexical word processing is unaffected by rapid invisible frequency tagging in reading: Evidence from eye movements

Heather Sheridan, Yali Pan, Steven Frisson, Veronika Prigorkina
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
Reading and Literacy Development
article

Lexical word processing is unaffected by rapid invisible frequency tagging in reading: Evidence from eye movements

Heather Sheridan, Yali Pan, Steven Frisson, Veronika Prigorkina
article en

Abstract

The aim of this study was to test whether rapid invisible frequency tagging (RIFT)-a promising tool to directly measure covert attention allocated to parafoveal words-affects lexical processing during natural reading. RIFT involves flickering the background of the target word(s) at an imperceptible frequency (≥60 Hz), but imperceptibility does not necessarily equate to the absence of a cognitive effect. The current study examined the potential impact of the RIFT paradigm on eye movements. Forty-eight participants read 474 high-frequency and low-frequency target words that were embedded in one-line sentences and displayed randomly in three condition blocks: no tagging, invisible tagging at 60 Hz (i.e., the RIFT) and visible tagging at 30 Hz. Linear mixed-effect modelling and divergence point analysis revealed a robust frequency effect, with high-frequency words processed faster than low-frequency words, but, crucially, no significant differences across the three conditions in terms of its magnitude or onset latency, except for a miniscule effect on saccade amplitude (0.06˚). Overall fixation durations (irrespective of lexical frequency) did not differ between the no-tagging and RIFT conditions, but were significantly longer in the visible tagging condition, suggesting that deliberately drawing attention to the tagging area actually slowed down reading. Furthermore, a postexperiment questionnaire indicated relatively low RIFT awareness. Altogether, preserved lexical frequency effects of comparable magnitude, similar divergence points and overall fixation and saccade patterns, suggest that RIFT is a valid tool for measuring attention during reading that is unlikely to interfere with word processing and highlight its potential for application in ecologically valid settings involving eye movements.

Psychonomic Bulletin & ReviewVol. 33(6)
University at Albany, State University of New York (US), University of Birmingham (GB), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
Leverhulme Trust
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Reading and Literacy Development
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.