Adaptive Rapid Serial Visual Presentation     
                                                  
Gustav quist 
gustav@stp.ling.uu.se 
Language Engineering Programme 
Department of Linguistics 
Uppsala University 

 
Abstract 
Can readability on small screens be improved by using Rapid Serial Visual 
Presentation (RSVP) that adapts the presentation speed to characteristics found in 
the text? In this thesis Adaptive RSVP is introduced together with two algorithms for 
adaptation. Findings from a usability evaluation, where the ability to read long and 
short texts on a mobile device in a realistic setting was assessed, are reported. In a 
balanced repeated-measurement experiment employing 16 subjects two variants of 
Adaptive RSVP were benchmarked against Fixed RSVP and traditional text 
presentation. No significant differences were found for reading speed and 
comprehension for long texts but for short texts all RSVP formats increased reading 
speed by 33%. For long texts Adaptive RSVP decreased task load compared to Fixed 
RSVP and repeated use of RSVP, regardless of type, was also found to decrease task 
load. No differences in task load were however found for short texts. Causes, 
implications and effects of these findings are discussed together with directions for 
further work. 
 
 

References                                                                            
                                                                                      
 1. Bjrnsson, C.H. (1968). Lsbarhet, Stockholm, Liber.                              
 2. Bruce, B., Rubin, A. and Starr, K. (1981). Why readability formulas fail.         
      IEEE Transactions on Professional Communicatio, nPC-24, 50-52.                  
 3. Bruijn, O. Spence, R. (2000). Rapid Serial Visual Presentation: A space-time 
trade-off in information presentation. In Proceedings of Advanced          
      Visual Interfaces, AVI2000, 189-192.                                            
 4. Castelhano, M.S. and Muter, P. (2001). Optimizing the reading of                  
      electronic text using rapid serial visual presentation. Behaviour &             
      Information Technology, 20(4), 237-247.                                         
 5. Chen, H.C. and Chan, K.T. (1990). Reading computer-displayed moving               
      text with and without self-control over the display rate. Behaviour &           
      Information Technology, 9(3), 467-477.                                          
 6. Cocklin, T.G., Ward, N.J., Chen, H.C. and Juola, J.F. (1984). Factors             
      influencing readability of rapid presented text segments. Memory &              
      Cognition, 12(5), 431442.                                                      
 7. Dillon, A., Richardson, J. and McKnight, C. (1990). The effect of display         
      size and text splitting on reading lengthy text from screen. Behaviour and      
      Information Technology, 9(3), 215-227.                                          
 8. Dillon, A. (1992). Reading From Paper Versus Screens: A Critical Review           
      of the Empirical Literature. Ergonomics, 35(10): 1297-1326.                     
 9. Duchnicky, R.L. and Kolers, P.A. (1983). Readability of text scrolled on          
      visual display terminals as a function of window sizHuman Factorse.            , 25, 
      683-692.                                                                        
 10. Dodge, R. (1900). Visual perceptions during eye movemePsychological nt.          
      Review, VII, 454-465.                                                           
 11. Ericsson, T., Chincholle, D. and Goldstein, M. (2001). Both the device and       
      the service influence WAP usabilityIHM-HCI2001, ,            Volume II, Usability 
      in Practice by J. Vanderdonckt, A. Blandford and A. Derycke (Eds.), Short       
      paper, 10-14 September, Lille, France, 79-85.                                   
 12. Fine, E.M. and Peli, E. (1995). Scrolled and rapid serial visual presentation    
      texts are read at similar rates by the visually impaired. Journal of Optical    
      Society of America, 12(10), 2286-2292.                                          
 13. Forster, K. I. (1970). Visual perception of rapidly presented word               
      sequences of varying complexityPercep. Psychophys. .          8, 215-221.       
 14. Goldstein, M., Sicheritz, K. and Anneroth, M., (2001). Reading from a            
      small display using the RSVP technique. Nordic Radio Symposium,                 
      NRS01, Nynshamn, Sweden.                                                       
 15. Goldstein, M., qvist, G., Bayat-M, M., Ljungstrand, P. and Bjrk, S.            
      (2001). Enhancing the reading experience: Using adaptive and sonified           
      RSVP for reading on small displaysProceedings of W.             orkshop on Mobile 
      Devices at IHM-HCI 2001, Lille, September 2001.                                 
 16. Goldstein, M., quist, G. and Bjrk, S. (2001). Immersion does not               
      Guarantee Excitement: Evaluating Sonified Rapid Serial Visual                   
      Presentation. Full paper submitted to Designing Interactive Systems,            
      DIS2002.                                                                        
 17. Gould, J.D. and Grischkowsky, N. (1984). Doing the same Work with Hard           
      Copy and with Cathode-Ray (CRT) computer terminals. Human Factors,              
      26(3), 323-337.                                                                 
 18. Gould, J.D., Alfaro, L., Finn, R., Haupt, B. and Minuto, A. (1987). Reading      
      From CRT Displays Can Be as Fast as Reading From Paper. Human                   
      Factors, 29(5), 497-517.                                                        
 19. Granaas, M. M., McKay, T. D., Laham, R. D., Hurt, L. D., & Juola, J. F.          
      (1984). Reading moving text on a CRT screen. Human Factors, 26(1), 97-          
      104.                                                                            
 20. Hart, S.G. and Staveland, L.E. (1988). Development of Nasa-TLX (Task             
      Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. Human Mental        
      Workload, by P.A. Hancock and N. Meshkati (eds.). Elsevier Science              
      Publishers, B.V.: North-Holland.                                                
 21. Hill, B. (1999). The Magic of Reading. Available at:                             
      http://slate.msn.com/ebooks/ (December 2001).                                   
 22. Huey, E.B. (1968). The psychology and pedagogy of reading. Cambridge,            
      MA: MIT Press. (Originally published 1908).                                     
 23. Jackson, M.D. and McClelland, J.L. (1979). Processing determinants of            
      reading speed. Journal of experimental psychology, 108, 151181.                
 24. Joula, J.F., Ward, N.J. and MacNamara, T. (1982). Visual search and              
      reading of rapid serial presentations of letter strings, words and text. J.     
      Exper. Psychol.: General, 111, 208-227.                                         
 25. Juola, J.F., Tiritoglu, A., and Pleunis, J. (1995). Reading text presented on a  
      small display. Applied Ergonomics, 26, 227-229.                                 
 26. Judd, C.H. and Buswell, G.T. (1922). Silent reading: A study of the various      
      types. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.                                
 27. Just, M. A., and Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye          
      fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87(4), 329-354.               
 28. Just, M.A., Carpenter, P.A. and Masson, M.E.J. (1982). What eye fixations        
      tell us about speed-reading and skimming. (Eye-lab Technical Report)            
      Carnegie-Mellon University.                                                     
 29. Kang, T.J., and Muter, P. (1989). Reading Dynamically Displayed Text.            
      Behaviour & Information Technology, 1989, 8(1), 33-42.                          
 30. Klare, G. R. (1984). Readability. InHandbook of Reading Research,                P.D. 
      Pearson (Ed.), Longman Inc, New York, 681-743.                                  
 31. Kump, P. (1999). Break-trough rapid reading. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall           
      Press.                                                                          
 32. Masson, MEJ. (1983). Conceptual processing of text during skimming and           
      rapid sequential readingMem.      ory and Cognition, 11, 262-274.               
 33. McCrickard, D.S., Catrambone R. and Stasko, J.T. (2001). Evaluating              
      Animation in the Periphery as a Mechanism for Maintaining Awareness. In         
      proceedings of INTERACT 2001, 148-156.                                          
 34. Mills, C.B. and Weldon, L.J. (1987). Reading text from computer screens.         
      ACM Computing Surveys, 19(4), ACM Press.                                        
 35. Muter, P., Kruk, R. S., Buttigieg, M. A., and Kang, T. J. (1988). Reader-        
      controlled computerized presentation of text. Human Factors, 30, 473-486.       
 36. Muter, P. and Maurutto, P. (1991). Reading and skimming from computer 
      screens and books: The paperless office revisited? Behavior & Information 
      Technology, 10, 257266.                                         
 37. Muter, P. (1996). Interface Design and Optimization of Reading of 
      Continuous Text. InC ognitive aspects of electronic text processing. H. van 
      Oostendorp and S. de Mul  (Eds.). Norwood, N.J.:Ablex.           
 38. Osborne, D.J. and Holton, D. (1988). Reading From Screen Vs. Paper: 
      There Is No Difference. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 28, 
      1-9.                                                             
 39. Paulson, L.J. and Goodman, K.S. (1999). Influential Studies in Eye-
      Movement Research. International Reading Association. Available at: 
      http://www.readingonline.org (December 2001).                    
 40. Potter, M. C. (1984). Rapid Serial Visual Presentation (RSVP): A method 
      for studying language processing. InNew Methods in Reading       
      Comprehension Research. D.E., Kieras and M.A., Just (Eds.). Hillsdale, 
      N.J: Erlbaum.                                                    
 41. Proctor, R.W. and Proctor, J.D. (1997). Sensation and Perception. In G. 
      Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics. Second 
      Edition, Wiley-Interscience, New York, 53-57.                    
 42. Rahman, T. and Muter, P. (1999). Designing an interface to optimize 
      reading with small display windows. Human Factors, 1(1), 106-117, 
      Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.                            
 43. Rayner, K. and Pollatsek, A. (1989). The psychology of reading.   
      Englewood Cliffs, New York: Prentice Hall.                       
 44. Rayner, K. and Sereno, S.C. (1994). Eye movements in reading:     
      Psycholinguistic studies. In M.A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of 
      psycholinguistics. San Diego, CA: Academic.                      
 45. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 
      20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422.      
 46. Redish, J. (1981). Understanding the limitations of readability formulas. 
      IEEE Transactions on Professional Communicatio, PC-n            24, 46-48. 
 47. Reichle, E.D., Rayner, K. and Pollatsek, A. (2000). Comparing the E-Z 
      Reader Model to Other Models of Eye Movement Control in Reading. 
      CogPrints electronic archive for papers. Available at:           
      http://cogprints.soton.ac.uk/ (December 2001).                   
 48. Reilly, R. (1993). A connectionist framework for modeling eye-movement 
      control in reading. In G. dYdewalle & Van Rensbergen (Eds.), Perception 
      and Cognition: Advances in Eye Movement Research, 191-212.       
      Amsterdam: North Holland.                                        
 49. Robeck, M.C. and Wallace, R.R. (1990). The Psychology of Reading: An 
      Interdisciplinary Approach, Second edition, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 
      Hillsdale: New Jersey.                                           
 50. Russel, M., Hull, J. and Wesley, R. (2001). Reading with RSVP on a Small 
      Screen: Does Font Size Matter? Usability News Winter 2001, Software ,
      Usability Research Laboratory, Wichita State University  .       
 51. Shneiderman, B. (1998). Human-Computer Interaction, 3rd ed., Addison 
      Wesley Longman, Inc, 412-414.                                    
 52. Sekey, A. & Tietz, J. (1982). Text display by saccadic scrollingVi. sible 
      Language, 16, 62-76.                                             
 53. Sicheritz, K. (2000). Applying the Rapid Serial Presentation Technique to 
      Personal Digital Assistants, Masters Thesis, Department of Linguistics, 
      Uppsala University. Available at: http://stp.ling.uu.se/ (December 2001). 
 54. Taylor, I. and Taylor, M.M. (1983). The Psychology of Reading. Toronto, 
      Academic Press. 
 55. Tekfi, C. (1987). Readability formulas: An Overview, Journal of 
      Documentation, 43(3) 261-73. 
 56. Wickens, C. D. (1992). Engineering psychology and human performance, 
      2nd edition, Chapter 8, Harper Collins Publishers Inc., New York. 
 57. quist, G. and Goldstein, M. (2001). Towards an improved readability on 
      mobile devices: Evaluating Adaptive Rapid Serial Visual Presentation. Full 
      paper submitted to Advanced Visual Interfaces, AVI2002.  