Mislocated fixations can account for parafoveal-on-foveal effects in eye movements during reading

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 61, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 1239-1249

  Drieghe, Denis ^a   Rayner, Keith ^b   Pollatsek, Alexander ^b  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; EYE FIXATION; HUMAN; PHYSIOLOGY; READING; RETINA FOVEA; SACCADIC EYE MOVEMENT;

FIXATION, OCULAR; FOVEA CENTRALIS; HUMANS; READING; SACCADES;

EID: 44449120970     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470210701467953     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Brysbaert, M., Drieghe, D., & Vitu, F. (2005). Word skipping: Implications for theories of eye movement control in reading. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Cognitive processes in eye guidance (pp. 53-78). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
2. Drieghe, D., Brysbaert, M., & Desmet, T. (2005a). Parafoveal-on-foveal effects on eye movements in text reading: Does an extra space make a difference? Vision Research, 45, 1693-1706.
3. Drieghe, D., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2005b). Word skipping during reading revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 954-969.
4. Engbert, R., Nuthmann, A., & Kliegl, R. (2007). An iterative algorithm for the estimation of the distribution of mislocated fixations during reading. In R. P. G. Van Gompel, M. F. Fischer, W. S. Murray, & R. L. Hill (Eds.), Eye movements: A window on mind and brain (pp. 319-337). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
5. Engbert, R., Nuthmann, A., Richter, E., & Kliegl, R. (2005). SWIFT: A dynamical model of saccade generation during reading. Psychological Review, 112, 777-813.
6. Francis, W., & Kuĉera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
7. Henderson, J. M., & Ferreira, F. (1990). Effects of foveal processing difficulty on the perceptual span in reading: Implications for theories of reading eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 417-429.
8. Hyönä, J., & Bertram, R. (2004). Do frequency characteristics of nonfixated words influence the processing of fixated words during reading? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16, 104-127.
9. Inhoff, A. W., Starr, M., & Shindler, K. L. (2000). Is the processing of words during eye fixations in reading strictly serial? Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 1474-1484.
10. Kennedy, A., & Pynte, J. (2005). Parafoveal-on-foveal effects in normal reading. Vision Research, 45, 153-168.
11. 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.
12. McConkie,G.W., Kerr,P.W., Reddix,M.D.,&Zola, D. (1988). Eye movement control during reading: I. The location of initial eye fixations on words. Vision Research, 28, 1107-1118.
13. Nuthmann, A., Engbert, R., & Kliegl, R. (2005). Mislocated fixations during reading and the inverted optimal viewing position. Vision Research, 45, 2201-2217.
14. Rayner, K. (1975). The perceptual span and peripheral cues in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 65-81.
15. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422.
16. Rayner, K., & Juhasz, B. J. (2004). Eye movements in reading: Old questions and new directions. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16, 340-352.
17. Rayner, K., Liversedge, S. P., & White, S. J. (2006). Eye movements when reading disappearing text: The importance of the word to the right of the fixation. Vision Research, 46, 310-323.
18. Rayner, K., Pollatsek, A., Drieghe, D., Slattery, T. J., & Reichle, E. D. (2007). Tracking the mind during reading via eye movements: Comments on Kliegl, Nuthmann, and Engbert (2006). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 520-529.
19. Rayner, K., Sereno, S. C., & Raney, G. E. (1996). Eye movement control in reading: A comparison of two types of models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 1188-1200.
20. Rayner, K., Warren, T., Juhasz, B. J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2004). The effect of plausibility on eye movements during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 1290-1301.
21. 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.), Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 213-234). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
22. Reichle, E., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2007). Modeling the effects of lexical ambiguity on eye movements during reading. In R. P. G. Van Gompel, M. F. Fischer, W.S. Murray, & R. L. Hill (Eds.), Eye movements: A window on mind and brain (pp. 271-292). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
23. Reichle, E. D., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2003). The E-Z Reader model of eye movement control in reading: Comparisons to other models. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26, 445-526.
24. Reilly, R., & Radach, R. (2006). Some empirical tests of an interactive model of eye movement control in reading. Cognitive Systems Research, 7, 34-55.
25. Schroyens, W., Vitu, F., Brysbaert, M., & d'Ydewalle, G. (1999). Eye movements during reading: Foveal load and parafoveal processing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52A, 1021-1046.
26. 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, 3513-3533.
27. White, S. J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2006). Foveal processing difficulty does not modulate non-foveal orthographic influences on fixation positions. Vision Research, 46, 426-437.
28. White, S. J., Rayner, K., & Liversedge, S. P. (2005). Eye movements and the modulation of parafoveal processing by foveal processing difficulty: A reexamination. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 891-896.