Readers Are Parallel Processors.

Reading research has long endorsed the view that words are processed strictly one by one. The primary empirical test of this notion is the search for effects from upcoming words on readers' eye movements during sentence reading. Here we argue that no conclusions can be drawn from the absence of such effects, and that the serial versus parallel processing debate cannot be resolved without treading beyond the methodological scope of tracking eye movements. Recent considerations of how the brain organizes linguistic input have sparked key predictions in- and outside the realm of text reading, with ensuing research revealing phenomena that complicate the serial processing perspective. A case is made for parallelism, along with new methods to infer the cognitive architecture driving reading.