{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01765375854214123, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.297491039426523, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Types and tokens in visual letter perception.

Five experiments demonstrate that in briefly presented displays, subjects have difficulty distinguishing repeated instances of a letter or digit (multiple tokens of the same type). When subjects were asked to estimate the numerosity of a display, reports were lower for displays containing repeated letters, for example, DDDD, than for displays containing distinct letters, for example, NRVT. This homogeneity effect depends on the common visual form of adjacent letters. A distinct homogeneity effect, one that depends on the repetition of abstract letter identities, was also found: When subjects were asked to report the number of As and Es in a display, performance was poorer on displays containing two instances of a target letter, one appearing in uppercase and the other in lowercase, than on displays containing one of each target letter. This effect must be due to the repetition of identities, because visual form is not repeated in these mixed-case displays. Further experiments showed that this effect was not influenced by the context surrounding the target letters, and that it can be tied to limitations in attentional processing. The results are interpreted in terms of a model in which parallel encoding processes are capable of automatically analyzing information from several regions of the visual field simultaneously, but fail to accurately encode location information. The resulting representation is thus insufficient to distinguish one token from another because two tokens of a given type differ only in location. However, with serial attentional processing multiple tokens can be kept distinct, pointing to yet another limit on the ability to process visual information in parallel.