In 2013, The Journal of Memory and Language published a research-based cognitive psychology article titled “How Many Words Can We Read at a Time?” More Speaker Effects in Masked Priming” by Kenneth I. Forster. Forster, professor of psychology at the University of Arizona, believes that "when a masked word intervenes between the prime word (L1 (native language)) and the target (L2 (second language), three words must be processed simultaneously, and this under Under these conditions, shape priming is completely eliminated and identity priming is reduced, suggesting that the capacity of the lexical processor does not extend to three words the hypothesis according to which the. Priming takes place at the level of form as well as at the level of meaning. Forster, through this research, generalizes the information collected from all individuals seeking an advanced degree as if to say that since this is true for first-year students. , this must be the case true for all grade levels Although I understand his questions and his motivations not only in the questions he asks but also in his experiences and the goals he was trying to achieve by stating that. “Every time we read a word, we have to retrieve the stored content. information on the phonology, syntax and semantics of this word. Furthermore, this information must be retrieved extremely quickly and, given the amount of processing that must be done, it seems obvious that the processing of one word must overlap to some extent with the processing of the next word” (1). Although Forster makes many valid arguments regarding the number of words we can read at once, he fails to recognize those that do not fall into this category by testing only U...... middle of the article ......ded and the feedback was displayed, the next test was started automatically” (3). The results of this experiment were the mean RTs and error rates are reported in Mixed effects analysis of RTs showed that there was a significant identity priming effect (17.5 ms), t = 2.92, p < 0.01 which did not interact with type. of the speaker, t < 1. On the other hand, the priming effect of the form (4.5 ms) was not significant, t < 1. The only significant effect in the analysis of error rates was a slight increase in errors when the speaker was a nonword, z = 2.01, p = .04. The remaining three experiments followed but differed simply in the change of speaker. Experience showed me what Forster was trying to say. The terminology used and the general idea of ​​the subject was understandable but the complete understanding only took place after the experiments and results..