Journal Archive

The Korean Journal of Cognitve & Biological Psychology - Vol. 31 , No. 2

[ Original Article ]
The Korean Journal of Cognitve & Biological Psychology - Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 135-146
Abbreviation: KCBPA
ISSN: 1226-9654 (Print)
Print publication date 30 Apr 2019
Received 21 Mar 2019 Revised 26 Apr 2019 Accepted 29 Apr 2019

시각적 복잡도와 글자 구성이 한글 자극 탐지에 미치는 영향
안재붕1 ; 김태훈2 ; 최원일1,
2경남대학교 심리학과

The Effects of Visual Complexity and Character Structure on Hangul Perception
Jaeboong Ahn1 ; Tae Hoon Kim2 ; Wonil Choi1,
1Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology
2Kyungnam University
Correspondence to : 최원일, 광주과학기술원 기초교육학부, (61005) 광주시 북구 첨단과기로 123 대학A동 419호 E-mail:

ⓒ The Korean Society for Cognitive and Biological Psychology
Funding Information ▼


본 연구는 한글 자극의 시각적 복잡도와 글자 구성이 한글 자극 탐지에 어떤 영향을 미치는지를 알아보고자 수행되었다. 이를 위해서 본 연구는 실험 1에서 외곽 복잡도를 이용하여 시각적 복잡도를 조작하였고, 글자의 자모 구성을 조작하여 자음+모음(CV)과 자음+모음+자음(CVC) 두 개의 수준을 가졌다. 실험 2에서는 자음으로만 이루어진 자극을 사용하였다. 두 실험 모두 세 글자 과제를 사용하였는데, 이때 실험 참가자들은 주어진 세 글자 자극을 최대한 정확하게 보고하여야 했다. 실험 1의 결과, 시각적으로 단순한 자극이 복잡한 자극에 비해 유의미하게 높은 탐지율과 넓은 시각 폭을 보였다. 또한 시각적 복잡도가 통제된 경우에는 글자 구성의 효과가 유의미하게 나타났는데, CV자극의 탐지율이 CVC자극에 비해 낮았다. 실험 2는 자음으로만 이루어진 자극을 제시하였는데, 전반적인 탐지율이 실험 1에 비해 높았고, 좌시야에 비해 우시야에 제시된 자극의 탐지율이 높은 것을 관찰할 수 있었다. 이러한 결과를 통해 선행 연구와의 관련성을 논의하였고, 특히 한글 지각과정에서의 시각적 복잡도의 중요성에 대한 논의가 이루어졌다.


Two experiments were conducted to examine how visual complexity and character structure influence Hangul perception. To this end, we manipulated visual complexity using a perimetric complexity metric and character structure in Experiment 1. We used only consonants as stimuli in Experiment 2. We implemented a trigram presentation method where participants were asked to report the presented trigram as accurately as possible. In Experiment 1, the results showed that accuracy rates in the simple visual complexity condition were higher that those in the complex condition, and that when visual complexity was controlled, the effect of character structure was significant such that the CV stimuli showed lower accuracy rates than the CVC stimuli did. In Experiment 2 where the trigrams consisted of only consonants demonstrated that overall accuracy was higher in Experiment 2 than Experiment 1, and that it was higher when the stimuli were presented in the right visual field relative to when they were in the left visual field. We discussed these results in relationship with findings in previous literature, especially with respect to the crucial role of visual complexity in perceptual processes in Korean.

Keywords: Korean perception, visual complexity, character structure
키워드: 한글지각, 시각적 복잡도, 글자 구성


이 논문은 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단(NRF-2017S1A3A2066319)과 과기정통부(NRF-2017R1C1B5014973)의 지원에 의해 수행되었음.

1. Attneave, F., & Arnoult, M. D. (1956). The quantitative study of shape and pattern perception. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 452-471.
2. Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes (R package version 0.999999-0). Available from
3. Bernard, J.-B., & Chung, S. T. L. (2011). The dependence of crowding on flanker complexity and target-flanker similarity. Journal of Vision, 11, 1-16.
4. Cho, J. R., & McBride-Chang, C. (2005). Correlates of Korean Hangul acquisition among kindergartners and second graders. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9, 3-16.
5. Choi, S., & Koh, S. (2009). The perceptual span during reading Korean sentences. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 20, 573-601.
6. Choi, Y., & Kim, T. (2016). Effect of syllable complexity on the visual span of Korean Hangul reading and its relation to reading abilities. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 27, 325-353.
7. Choi, Y., & Yu, S. (2015). Relationship between the development of visual span and reading abilities in Korean Hangul reading. The Korean Journal of Developmental Psychology, 28, 275-293.
8. Choi, Y., Jeong, S., & Kim, T. (2016). Can stroke count influence the visual span in Korean Hangul reading. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 28, 495-516.
9. Fine, E. M., & Rubin, G. S. (1999). Reading with central field loss: Number of letters masked is more important than the size of the mask in degrees. Vision Research, 39, 747-756.
10. Frey, A. & Bosse, M. (2018). Perceptual span, visual span, and visual attention span: Three potential ways to quantify limits on visual processing during reading. Visual Cognition, 26, 412-429.
11. He, Y., Kwon M., & Legge, G. E. (2018). Common constraints limit Korean and English character recognition in peripheral vision. Journal of Vision, 18, 1-15.
12. Kwon, M., Legge, G. E., & Dubbels, B. R. (2007). Developmental changes in the visual span for reading. Vision Research, 47, 2889-2900.
13. Legge, G. E., Ahn, S. J., Klitz, T. S., & Luebker, A. (1997). Psychophysics of reading. XVI. The visual span in normal and low vision. Vision Research, 37, 1999-2010.
14. Legge, G. E., Mansfield, J. S., & Chung, S. T. L. (2001). Psychophysics of reading. XX. Linking letter recognition to reading speed in central and peripheral vision. Vision Research, 41, 725-734.
15. Majaj, N. J., Pelli, D. G., Kurshan, P., & Palomares, M. (2002). The role of spatial frequency channels in letter identification. Vision Research, 42, 1165-1184.
16. McConkie, G. W., & Rayner, K. (1975). The span of the effective stimulus during a fixation in reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 17, 578-586.
17. O’Regan, J. K. (1990). Eye movements and reading E. Kowler (Ed.), Eye movements and their role in visual and cognitive processes. Elsevier, New York, pp. 395-453.
18. O'Regan, J. K., Lévy-Schoen, A., & Jacobs, A. M. (1983). The effect of visibility on eye-movement parameters in reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 34, 457-464.
19. Pelli, D. G., Burns, C. W., Farell, B., & Moore-Page, D. C. (2006). Feature detection and letter identification. Vision Research, 46, 4646-4674.
20. R Core Team (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL
21. Rayner, K. (1975). The perceptual span and peripheral cues in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 65-81.
22. Rayner, K. (1986). Eye movements and the perceptual span in beginning and skilled readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 41, 211-236.
23. Rayner, K., & Bertera, J. H. (1979). Reading without a fovea. Science, 206, 468-469.
24. Taylor, I., & Taylor, M. M. (2014). Writing and literacy in Chinese, Korean and Japanese: Revised edition (Vol. 14). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
25. Wang, H., He, X., & Legge, G. E. (2014). Effect of pattern complexity on the visual span for Chinese and alphabet characters. Journal of Vision, 14, 6-6.
26. Watson, A. B. (2012). Perimetric complexity of binary digital images. The Mathematica Journal, 14, 1-40.