A test of parafoveal-on-foveal effects with pairs of orthographically related words

European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 16, Issue 1-2, 2004, Pages 154-177

  Vitu, Françoise ^a   Brysbaert, Marc ^b   Lancelin, Denis ^a  

^a CNRS   (France)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; COGNITION; CONFERENCE PAPER; EYE MOVEMENT; EYE MOVEMENT CONTROL; FRANCE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INFORMATION PROCESSING; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; MEASUREMENT; NORMAL HUMAN; ORTHOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETINA FOVEA; STIMULUS RESPONSE; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUOMOTOR COORDINATION; WORD RECOGNITION;

EID: 1642458355     PISSN: 09541446     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09541440340000178     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (42)

1. Altarriba, J., Kambe, G., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2001). Semantic codes are not used in integrating information across eye fixations in reading: Evidence from fluent Spanish-English bilinguals. Perception and Psychophysics, 63(5), 875-890.
2. Andrews, S. (1997). The effects of orthographic similarity on lexical retrieval: Resolving neighborhood conflicts. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 4, 439-461.
3. Baccino, T., Lavigne, F., Gragnic, C., & Vitu, F. (2001). Parafoveal-on-foveal printing during eye movements: Semantic effects. Paper presented at the 10th European conference on Eye Movements, Turku, Finland.
4. Bouma, H. (1973). Visual interference in the parafoveal recognition of initial and final letters of words. Vision Research, 13, 767-782.
5. Bradshaw, J. L. (1974). Peripherally presented and unreported words may bias the perceived meaning of a centrally fixated homograph. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 103(6), 1200-1202.
6. Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1983). What your eyes do while your mind is reading. In K. Rayner (Ed.), Eye movements in reading: Perceptual and language processes (pp. 275-307). New York: Academic Press.
7. Coltheart, M., Davelaar, E., Jonasson, J. T., & Besner, D. (1977). Access to the internal lexicon. In S. Dornič (Ed.), Attention and performance VI (pp. 535-555). London: Academic Press.
8. Cornsweet, T. N., & Crane, H. D. (1973). Accurate two-dimensional eye tracker using first and fourth Purkinje images. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 63, 6-13.
9. Engbert, R., Longtin, A., & Kliegl, R. (2002). A dynamical model of saccade generation in reading based on spatially distributed lexical processing. Vision Research, 42, 621-636.
10. Ferrand, L. (2001) Cognition et lecture: Processus de base de la reconnaissance des mots écrits chez l'adulte. Bruxelles, Belgium: DeBoeck Université.
11. Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychological Review, 103, 518-565.
12. Henderson, J. M., & Ferreira, F. (1990). Effects of foveal processing difficulty on the perceptual span in reading: Implications for attention and eye movement control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 16(3), 417-429.
13. Henderson, J. M., & Ferreira, F. (1993). Eye movement control during reading: Fixation measures foveal but not parafoveal processing difficulty. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 201-221.
14. Inhoff, A. W., Radach, R., Starr, M., & Greenberg, S. (2000a). Allocation of visuo-spatial attention and saccade programming during reading. In A. Kennedy, R. Radach, D. Heller, & J. Pynte (Eds.), Reading as a perceptual process (pp. 301-326). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
15. Inhoff, A. W., & Rayner, K. (1986). Parafoveal word processing during eye fixations in reading: Effects of word frequency. Perception and Psychophysics, 40, 431-439.
16. Inhoff, A. W., Starr, M., & Shindler, K. L. (2000b). Is the processing of words during eye fixations in reading strictly serial? Perception and Psychophysics, 62(7), 1474-1484.
17. Kennedy, A. (1998). The influence of parafoveal words on foveal inspection times: Evidence for a processing trade-off. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Eye guidance in reading and scene perception (pp. 149-223). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
18. Kennedy, A. (2000). Parafoveal processing in word recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A(2), 429-455.
19. Kennedy, A., Pynte, J., & Ducrot, S. (2002). Parafoveal-on-foveal interactions in word recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55A, 1307-1337.
20. Kennison, S. M., & Clifton, C. C. (1995). Determinants of parafoveal preview benefit in high and low working memory capacity readers: Implications for eye movement control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 68-81.
21. McConkie, G. W. (1979). On the role and control of eye movements in reading. In P. A. Kolers, M. E. Wrolstad, & H. Bouma (Eds.), Processing of visible language (Vol. 1). New York: Plenum.
22. Morrison, R. E. (1984). Manipulation of stimulus onset delay in reading: Evidence for parallel programming of saccades. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 667-682.
23. Mozer, M. C. (1983). Letter migration in word perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 531-546.
24. Murray, W. S. (1998). Parafoveal pragmatics. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Eye guidance in reading and scene perception. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
25. Perea, M. (1998). Orthographic neighbors are not all equal: Evidence using an identification technique. Language and Cognitive Processes, 13(1), 77-90.
26. Pollatsek, A., Perea, M., & Binder, K. S. (1999). The effects of "neighborhood size" in reading and lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25(4), 1142-1158.
27. Rayner, K. (1975). The perceptual span and peripheral cues in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 65-81.
28. Rayner, K., Reichle, E. D., & Pollatsek, A. (1998). Eye movement control in reading: An overview. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Eye guidance in reading and scene perception. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
29. Rayner, K., White, S. J., Kambe, G., Miller, B., & Liversedge, S. P. (2003). On the processing of meaning from parafoveal vision during eye fixations in reading. In J. Hyönä, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind's eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 213-234). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
30. Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., Fisher, D. L., & Rayner, K. (1998). Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review, 105(1), 125-157.
31. Schiepers, C. W. (1980). Response latency and accuracy in visual word recognition. Perception and Psychophysics, 27, 71-81.
32. Schilling, H. E. H., Rayner, K., & Chumbley, J. L. (1998). Comparing naming, lexical decision, and eye fixation times: Word frequency effects and individual differences. Memory and Cognition, 26, 1270-1281.
33. Schroyens, W., Vitu, F., Brysbaert, M., & d'Ydewalle, G. (1999). Eye movement control during reading: Foveal load and parafoveal processing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52A(4), 1021-1046.
34. Segui, J., & Grainger, J. (1990). Priming word recognition with orthographic neighbors: Effects of relative prime-target frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16(1), 65-76.
35. Treisman, A., & Souther, J. (1986). Illusory words: The roles of attention and of top-down constraints in conjoining letters to form words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 12(1), 3-17.
36. Trésor de la langue française. (1971). Nancy, France: CNRS.
37. Van Rensbergen, J., & de Troy, A. (1993). A reference guide for the Leuven dual-PC controlled Purkinje eyetracking system (Tech. Rep.). Laboratory of Experimental Psychology, Catholic University of Leuven.
38. Vitu, F. (1991). The influence of parafoveal preprocessing and linguistic context on the optimal landing position effect. Perception and Psychophysics, 50, 58-75.
39. Vitu, F. (1993). The influence of the reading rhythm on the optimal landing position effect. In G. d'Ydewalle & J. Van Rensbergen (Eds.), Perception and cognition: Advances in eye movement research (pp. 181-192). Amsterdam: North Holland.
40. Vitu, F., McConkie, G. W., Kerr, P., & O'Regan, J. K. (2001). Fixation location effects on fixation durations during reading: An inverted optimal viewing position effect. Vision Research, 41(25-26), 3511-3531.
41. Vitu, F., & O'Regan, J. K. (1995). A challenge to current theories of eye movements in reading. In J. Findlay, R. W. Kentridge, & R. Walker (Eds.), Eye movement research: Mechanisms, processes and applications (pp. 381-392). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
42. White, S. J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2004). Orthographic familiarity influences initial eye fixation positions in reading. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16(1/2), 52-78.