Literature DB >> 15945206

Fixation durations before word skipping in reading.

Reinhold Kliegl1, Ralf Engbert.   

Abstract

We resolve a controversy about reading fixations before word-skipping saccades which were reported as longer or shorter than control fixations in earlier studies. Our statistics are based on resampling of matched sets of fixations before skipped and nonskipped words, drawn from a database of 121,321 single fixations contributed by 230 readers of the Potsdam sentence corpus. Matched fixations originated from single-fixation forward-reading patterns and were equated for their positions within words. Fixations before skipped words were shorter before short or high-frequency words and longer before long or low-frequency words in comparison with control fixations. Reasons for inconsistencies in past research and implications for computational models are discussed.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15945206     DOI: 10.3758/bf03196358

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  7 in total

1.  Fixation location effects on fixation durations during reading: an inverted optimal viewing position effect.

Authors:  F Vitu; G W McConkie; P Kerr; J K O'Regan
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  Mathematical models of eye movements in reading: a possible role for autonomous saccades.

Authors:  R Engbert; R Kliegl
Journal:  Biol Cybern       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 2.086

3.  A dynamical model of saccade generation in reading based on spatially distributed lexical processing.

Authors:  Ralf Engbert; André Longtin; Reinhold Kliegl
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 1.886

Review 4.  The E-Z reader model of eye-movement control in reading: comparisons to other models.

Authors:  Erik D Reichle; Keith Rayner; Alexander Pollatsek
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 12.579

Review 5.  Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research.

Authors:  K Rayner
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 17.737

Review 6.  Toward a model of eye movement control in reading.

Authors:  E D Reichle; A Pollatsek; D L Fisher; K Rayner
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  Inferences about eye movement control from the perceptual span in reading.

Authors:  A Pollatsek; K Rayner; D A Balota
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1986-08
  7 in total
  13 in total

1.  Eye Movements in Reading: Models and Data.

Authors:  Keith Rayner
Journal:  J Eye Mov Res       Date:  2009-04-03       Impact factor: 0.957

2.  Eye movements and parafoveal word processing in reading Chinese.

Authors:  Miao-Hsuan Yen; Jie-Li Tsai; Ovid J-L Tzeng; Daisy L Hung
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2008-07

3.  Foveal processing and word skipping during reading.

Authors:  Denis Drieghe
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2008-08

4.  Skipping syntactically illegal the previews: The role of predictability.

Authors:  Matthew J Abbott; Bernhard Angele; Y Danbi Ahn; Keith Rayner
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2015-06-15       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Eye movements and word skipping during reading: effects of word length and predictability.

Authors:  Keith Rayner; Timothy J Slattery; Denis Drieghe; Simon P Liversedge
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Readers extract character frequency information from nonfixated-target word at long pretarget fixations during Chinese reading.

Authors:  Guojie Ma; Xingshan Li; Keith Rayner
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2015-07-13       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Using E-Z reader to examine word skipping during reading.

Authors:  Erik D Reichle; Denis Drieghe
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2012-12-03       Impact factor: 3.051

8.  Coordination of word recognition and oculomotor control during reading: the role of implicit lexical decisions.

Authors:  Wonil Choi; Peter C Gordon
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2012-10-29       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Word-Initial Letters Influence Fixation Durations during Fluent Reading.

Authors:  Christopher J Hand; Patrick J O'Donnell; Sara C Sereno
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-04-02

10.  The zoom lens of attention: Simulating shuffled versus normal text reading using the SWIFT model.

Authors:  Daniel J Schad; Ralf Engbert
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2012-05-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.