Literature DB >> 22686842

See before you jump: full recognition of parafoveal words precedes skips during reading.

Peter C Gordon1, Patrick Plummer, Wonil Choi.   

Abstract

Serial attention models of eye-movement control during reading were evaluated in an eye-tracking experiment that examined how lexical activation combines with visual information in the parafovea to affect word skipping (where a word is not fixated during first-pass reading). Lexical activation was manipulated by repetition priming created through prime-target pairs embedded within a sentence. The boundary technique (Rayner, 1975) was used to determine whether the target word was fully available during parafoveal preview or whether it was available with transposed letters (e.g., Herman changed to Hreman). With full parafoveal preview, the target word was skipped more frequently when it matched the earlier prime word (i.e., was repeated) than when it did not match the earlier prime word (i.e., was new). With transposed-letter (TL) preview, repetition had no effect on skipping rates despite the great similarity of the TL preview string to the target word and substantial evidence that TL strings activate the words from which they are derived (Perea & Lupker, 2003). These results show that lexically based skipping is based on full recognition of the letter string in parafoveal preview and does not involve using the contextual constraint to compensate for the reduced information available from the parafovea. These results are consistent with models of eye-movement control during reading in which successive words in a text are processed 1 at a time (serially) and in which word recognition strongly influences eye movements. (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22686842      PMCID: PMC3633587          DOI: 10.1037/a0028881

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn        ISSN: 0278-7393            Impact factor:   3.051


  19 in total

1.  Does jugde activate COURT? Transposed-letter similarity effects in masked associative priming.

Authors:  Manuel Perea; Stephen J Lupker
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2003-09

2.  SWIFT: a dynamical model of saccade generation during reading.

Authors:  Ralf Engbert; Antje Nuthmann; Eike M Richter; Reinhold Kliegl
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  Eye movements and word skipping during reading revisited.

Authors:  Denis Drieghe; Keith Rayner; Alexander Pollatsek
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Parafoveal processing in reading: Manipulating n + 1 and n + 2 previews simultaneously.

Authors:  Bernhard Angele; Timothy J Slattery; Jinmian Yang; Reinhold Kliegl; Keith Rayner
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2008-06-01

5.  Effects of contextual constraint on eye movements in reading: A further examination.

Authors:  K Rayner; A D Well
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1996-12

6.  Coreference and lexical repetition: mechanisms of discourse integration.

Authors:  Kerry Ledoux; Peter C Gordon; C Christine Camblin; Tamara Y Swaab
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2007-06

7.  Effects of foveal processing difficulty on the perceptual span in reading: implications for attention and eye movement control.

Authors:  J M Henderson; F Ferreira
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 3.051

8.  Eye movement control in reading: a comparison of two types of models.

Authors:  K Rayner; S C Sereno; G E Raney
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Word frequency effects and eye movements during two readings of a text.

Authors:  G E Raney; K Rayner
Journal:  Can J Exp Psychol       Date:  1995-06

10.  Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity.

Authors:  K Rayner; S A Duffy
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1986-05
View more
  14 in total

1.  Word skipping during sentence reading: effects of lexicality on parafoveal processing.

Authors:  Wonil Choi; Peter C Gordon
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  Failure to detect function word repetitions and omissions in reading: Are eye movements to blame?

Authors:  Adrian Staub; Sophia Dodge; Andrew L Cohen
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2019-02

3.  It takes time to prime: semantic priming in the ocular lexical decision task.

Authors:  Renske S Hoedemaker; Peter C Gordon
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2014-09-01       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Subsequent to suppression: Downstream comprehension consequences of noun/verb ambiguity in natural reading.

Authors:  Mallory C Stites; Kara D Federmeier
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2015-05-11       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Eye Movements while Reading Biased Homographs: Effects of Prior Encounter and Biasing Context on Reducing the Subordinate Bias Effect.

Authors:  Mallorie Leinenger; Keith Rayner
Journal:  J Cogn Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2013-01-01

6.  Effective scheduling of looking and talking during rapid automatized naming.

Authors:  Peter C Gordon; Renske S Hoedemaker
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2015-12-21       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Stress matters revisited: a boundary change experiment.

Authors:  Mara Breen; Charles Clifton
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2013-02-21       Impact factor: 2.143

8.  Word recognition during reading: the interaction between lexical repetition and frequency.

Authors:  Matthew W Lowder; Wonil Choi; Peter C Gordon
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2013-07

9.  Anticipating syntax during reading: Evidence from the boundary change paradigm.

Authors:  Trevor Brothers; Matthew J Traxler
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2016-04-28       Impact factor: 3.051

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.