Examining the word identification stages hypothesized by the E-Z Reader model

Psychological Science

Volumn 17, Issue 9, 2006, Pages 742-746

  Reingold, Eyal M ^a   Rayner, Keith ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; EYE FIXATION; EYE MOVEMENT; HUMAN; LINGUISTICS; READING;

EYE MOVEMENTS; FIXATION, OCULAR; HUMANS; READING; VOCABULARY;

EID: 33748686178     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: 14679280     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01775.x     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Balota, D.A., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1985). The interaction of contextual constraints and parafoveal visual information in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 364-390.
2. Besner, D., & McCann, R.S. (1987). Word frequency and pattern distortion in visual word identification and production: An examination of four classes of models. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 201-219). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Besner, D., & Roberts, M.A. (2003). Reading nonwords aloud: Results requiring change in the dual route cascaded model. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 398-404.
4. Drieghe, D., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2005). Eye movements and word skipping during reading revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 954-959.
5. 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.
6. Engbert, R., Nuthmann, A., Richter, E.M., & Kliegl, R. (2005). SWIFT: A dynamical model of saccade generation during reading. Psychological Review, 112, 777-813.
7. Francis, W.N., & Kucera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
8. 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, 417-429.
9. Herdman, C.M., Chemecki, D., & Norris, D. (1999). Naming case alternated words. Memory & Cognition, 27, 254-266.
10. Inhoff, A.W., Pollatsek, A., Posner, M.I., & Rayner, K. (1989). Covert attention and eye movements during reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41A, 63-89.
11. Kennison, S.M., & Clifton, 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.
12. Mayall, K.A., Humphreys, G.W., Mechelli, A., Olson, A., & Price, C.J. (2001). The effects of case mixing on word recognition: Evidence from a PET study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13, 844-853.
13. Morrison, R.E. (1984). Manipulation of stimulus onset delay in reading: Evidence for parallel programming of saccades. Journal of Ex perimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 667-682.
14. Pollatsek, A., Reichle, E., & Rayner, K. (2003). Modeling eye movements in reading. In J. Hyönä, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind's eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 361-390). Amsterdam: North Holland.
15. Pollatsek, A., Reichle, E.D., & Rayner, K. (2006). Tests of the E-Z Reader Model: Exploring the interface between cognition and eyemovement control. Cognitive Psychology, 52, 1-56.
16. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422.
17. Rayner, K., Ashby, J., Pollatsek, A., & Reichle, E. (2004). The effects of frequency and predictability on eye fixations in reading: Implications for the E-Z Reader model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 720-732.
18. Rayner, K., & Duffy, S.A. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory & Cognition, 14, 191-201.
19. Rayner, K., Sereno, S.C., Morris, R.K., Schmauder, A.R., & Clifton, C. (1989). Eye movements and on-line language comprehension processes. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, 21-49.
20. Rayner, K.,& Well, A.D. (1996). Effects of contextual constraint on eye movements in reading: A further examination. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 504-509.
21. Reichle, E., Pollatsek, A., Fisher, D.L., & Rayner, K. (1998). Towards a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review, 105, 125-157.
22. Reichle, E.D., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1999). Eye movement control in reading: Accounting for initial fixation locations and refixations within the E-Z Reader model. Vision Research, 39, 4403-4411.
23. Reichle, E.D., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2003). The E-Z Reader model of eye movement control in reading: Comparison to other models. Brain and Behavioral Sciences, 26, 445-476.
24. Reilly, R., & Radach, R. (2003). Foundations of an interactive activation model of eye movement control in reading. In J. Hyönä, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind's eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement, research (pp. 429-455). Amsterdam: North Holland.
25. Reingold, E.M. (2003). Eye movement control in reading: Models and predictions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26, 500-501.
26. Reynolds, M., & Besner, D. (2004). Neighbourhood density, word frequency, and spelling-sound regularity effects in naming: Similarities and differences between skilled readers and the dual route cascaded computational model. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 13-31.
27. Starr, M.S., & Rayner, K. (2001). Eye movements during reading: Some current controversies. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5, 156-163.
28. White, S.J., Rayner, K., & Liversedge, S.P. (2005a). Eye movements and the modulation of parafoveal processing by foveal processing difficulty: A reexamination. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 891-896.
29. White, S.J., Rayner, K., & Liversedge, S.P. (2005b). The influence of parafoveal word length and contextual constraint on fixation durations and word skipping in reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 466-471.