{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026845637583892617, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0026845637583892616, 'mean_word_length': 5.781818181818182, '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}}
BASIC versus natural language: is there one underlying comprehension process?

This study determined the response time (RT) for subjects to comprehend eight different BASIC statements and eight corresponding English procedural statements. First, there was no significant interaction between language and statement, and there was a high correlation (r = .85) between English and BASIC RT performance. Second, the microstructure of each statement (the number of actions required) and the macrostructure (the number of other statements in the program) were strongly related to RT performance for both BASIC and English. Apparently, comprehension of procedural statements is related to underlying structural characteristics common to both languages.