Eye movements and brain electric potentials during reading

Psychological Research

Volumn 76, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 145-158

  Kliegl, Reinhold ^a   Dambacher, Michael ^a,b   Dimigen, Olaf ^a,c   Jacobs, Arthur M ^b   Sommer, Werner ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF POTSDAM   (Germany)

^b FREIE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

^c HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATTENTION; BRAIN; EVOKED RESPONSE; EYE MOVEMENT; HUMAN; PHYSIOLOGY; READING; REVIEW;

ATTENTION; BRAIN; EVOKED POTENTIALS; EYE MOVEMENTS; HUMANS; READING;

EID: 84857050892     PISSN: 03400727     EISSN: 14302772     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-011-0376-x     Document Type: Review

References (64)

1. Berg, P., & Scherg, M. (1994). A multiple source approach to the correction of eye artifacts. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 90(3), 229-241.
2. Carr, T. H., & Pollatsek, A. (1985). Recognizing printed words: A look at current models. In D. Besner, T. G. Waller & G. E. MacKinnon (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice (Vol. 5, pp. 1-82). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
3. Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108(1), 204-256. doi: 10. 1037//0033-295x. 108. 1. 204.
4. Dambacher, M. (2010). Bottom-up and top-down processes in reading: Influences of frequency and predictability on event-related potentials and eye movements. PhD Thesis. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.
5. Dambacher, M., Göllner, K., Nuthmann, A., Jacobs, A., & Kliegl, R. (2008). Frequency and predictability effects on event-related potentials and eye-movements. International Journal of Psychology, 43(3-4), 46-47.
6. Dambacher, M., & Kliegl, R. (2007). Synchronizing timelines: Relations between fixation durations and N400 amplitudes during sentence reading. Brain Research, 1155, 147-162. doi: 10. 1016/j. brainres. 2007. 04. 027.
7. Dambacher, M., Kliegl, R., Hofmann, M., & Jacobs, A. M. (2006). Frequency and predictability effects on event-related potentials during reading. Brain Research, 1084, 89-103. doi: 10. 1016/j. brainres. 2006. 02. 010.
8. Dambacher, M., Rolfs, M., Göllner, K., Kliegl, R., & Jacobs, A. M. (2009). Event-related potentials reveal rapid verification of predicted visual input. PLoS ONE, 4(3), e5047. doi: 10. 1371/journal. pone. 0005047.
9. Dimigen, O., Sommer, W., Dambacher, M., & Kliegl, R. (2008). Simultaneous recording of eye movements and ERPs indicates early access to word meaning in natural, left-to-right reading. International Journal of Psychology, 43(3-4), 47.
10. Dimigen, O., Sommer, W., Hohlfeld, A., Jacobs, A. M., & Kliegl, R. (2011). Co-registration of eye movements and EEG in natural reading: Analyses and review. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. doi: 10. 1037/a0023885.
11. Dimigen, O., Valsecchi, M., Sommer, W., & Kliegl, R. (2009). Human microsaccade-related visual brain responses. The Journal of Neuroscience, 29(39), 12321-12331. doi: 10. 1523/jneurosci. 0911-09. 2009.
12. Engbert, R., & Kliegl, R. (2001). Mathematical models of eye movements in reading: A possible role for autonomous saccades. Biological Cybernetics, 85(2), 77-87.
13. Engbert, R., & Kliegl, R. (2011). Parallel graded attention models of reading. In S. P. Liversedge, I. D. Gilchrist & S. Everling (Eds.), Eye Movements Handbook. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14. Engbert, R., Nuthmann, A., Richter, E. M., & Kliegl, R. (2005). SWIFT: A dynamical model of saccade generation during reading. Psychological Review, 112(4), 777-813. doi: 10. 1037/0033-295x. 112. 4. 777.
15. Friederici, A. D., & Weissenborn, J. (2007). Mapping sentence form onto meaning: The syntax-semantic interface. Brain Research, 1146, 50-58. doi: 10. 1016/j. brainres. 2006. 08. 038.
16. Gough, P. B. (1972). One second of reading. Visible Language, 6(4), 291-320.
17. Graf, R., Nagler, M., & Jacobs, A. M. (2005). Faktorenanalyse von 57 Variablen der visuellen Worterkennung (Factor analysis of 57 variables in visual word recognition). Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 213(4), 205-218. doi: 10. 1026/0044-3409. 213. 4. 205.
18. Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychological Review, 103(3), 518-565.
19. Hagoort, P., Baggio, G., & Willems, R. M. (2009). Semantic unification. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences (4th ed., pp. 819-835). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
20. Hagoort, P., & Brown, C. M. (2000). ERP effects of listening to speech compared to reading: The P600/SPS to syntactic violations in spoken sentences and rapid serial visual presentation. Neuropsychologia, 38(11), 1531-1549.
21. Hagoort, P., & van Berkum, J. (2007). Beyond the sentence given. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 362(1481), 801-811. doi: 10. 1098/rstb. 2007. 2089.
22. 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.
23. Inhoff, A. W., Radach, R., Starr, M., & Greenberg, S. (2000). 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. 221-246). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
24. Jacobs, A. M., & Grainger, J. (1994). Models of visual word recognition: Sampling the state of the art. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(6), 1311-1334.
25. Jost, K., Hennighausen, E., & Rösler, F. (2004). Comparing arithmetic and semantic fact retrieval: Effects of problem size and sentence constraint on event-related brain potentials. Psychophysiology, 41(1), 46-59. doi: 10. 1111/1469-8986. 00119.
26. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87(4), 329-354.
27. Kennedy, A. (2000). Parafoveal processing in word recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53(2), 429-455.
28. Kennedy, A., & Pynte, J. (2005). Parafoveal-on-foveal effects in normal reading. Vision Research, 45(2), 153-168.
29. Kennedy, A., Pynte, J., & Ducrot, S. (2002). Parafoveal-on-foveal interactions in word recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55(4), 1307-1337. doi: 10. 1080/02724980244000071.
30. King, J. W., & Kutas, M. (1995). Who did what and when: Using word-level and clause-level ERPs to monitor working-memory usage in reading. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 7(3), 376-395.
31. Kliegl, R. (2007). Toward a perceptual-span theory of distributed processing in reading: A reply to Rayner, Pollatsek, Drieghe, Slattery, and Reichle (2007). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136(3), 530-537.
32. Kliegl, R., & Engbert, R. (2011). Evaluating a computational model of eye-movement control during reading. In J. H. Wolf (ed.), Models, simulations, and the reduction of complexity. Berlin-New York: Verlag der Akademie. DeGruyter.
33. Kliegl, R., Grabner, E., Rolfs, M., & Engbert, R. (2004). Length, frequency, and predictability effects of words on eye movements in reading. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16(1-2), 262-284. doi: 10. 1080/09541440340000213.
34. Kliegl, R., Nuthmann, A., & Engbert, R. (2006). Tracking the mind during reading: The influence of past, present, and future words on fixation durations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(1), 12-35. doi: 10. 1037/0096-3445. 135. 1. 12.
35. Kolers, P. A. (1976). Buswell's discoveries. In R. A. Monty & F. W. Senders (Eds.), Eye movements and psychological processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. Kretzschmar, F., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2009). Parafoveal versus foveal N400s dissociate spreading activation from contextual fit. Neuroreport, 20(18), 1613-1618. doi: 10. 1097/WNR. 0b013e328332c4f4.
37. Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2000). Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(12), 463-470.
38. Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 62(1), 621-647.
39. McConkie, G. W., & Rayner, K. (1975). The span of the effective stimulus during a fixation in reading. Perception and Psychophysics, 17(6), 578-586.
40. McConkie, G. W., Underwood, N. R., Zola, D., & Wolverton, G. S. (1985). Some temporal characteristics of processing during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11(2), 168-186.
41. 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(5), 667-682.
42. Niedeggen, M., & Rösler, F. (1999). N400 effects reflect activation spread during retrieval of arithmetic facts. Psychological Science, 10(3), 271-276.
43. Niedeggen, M., Rösler, F., & Jost, K. (1999). Processing of incongruous mental calculation problems: Evidence for an arithmetic N400 effect. Psychophysiology, 36(3), 307-324.
44. Nuthmann, A., Engbert, R., & Kliegl, R. (2005). Mislocated fixations during reading and the inverted optimal viewing position effect. Vision Research, 45(17), 2201-2217.
45. Picton, T. W., van Roon, P., Armilio, M. L., Berg, P., Ille, N., & Scherg, M. (2000). The correction of ocular artifacts: A topographic perspective. Clinical Neurophysiology, 111, 53-65.
46. Pollatsek, A., Reichle, E. D., & Rayner, K. (2006). Tests of the E-Z Reader model: Exploring the interface between cognition and eye-movement control. Cognitive Psychology, 52(1), 1-56.
47. Rayner, K. (1975). The perceptual span and peripheral cues in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 7(1), 65-81.
48. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372-422.
49. Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457-1506. doi: 10. 1080/17470210902816461.
50. Rayner, K., & Duffy, S. A. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory and Cognition, 14(3), 191-201.
51. Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1987). Eye movements in reading: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance 12: The psychology of reading (Vol. 12, pp. 327-362). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
52. 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(3), 520-529. doi: 10. 1037/0096-3445. 136. 3. 520.
53. 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.
54. 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.
55. 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(4), 445-526.
56. Reichle, E. D., Warren, T., & McConnell, K. (2009). Using E-Z Reader to model the effects of higher level language processing on eye movements during reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(1), 1-21. doi: 10. 3758/pbr. 16. 1. 1.
57. Reilly, R. G., & Radach, R. (2006). Some empirical tests of an interactive activation model of eye movement control in reading. Cognitive Systems Research, 7(1), 34-55. doi: 10. 1016/j. cogsys. 2005. 07. 006.
58. Roehm, D., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., Rösler, F., & Schlesewsky, M. (2007). To predict or not to predict: Influences of task and strategy on the processing of semantic relations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(8), 1259-1274.
59. Rösler, F. (2011). Psychophysiologie der Kognition-Eine Einführung in die Kognitive Neurowissenschaft (Psychophysiology of cognition-an introduction to cognitive neuroscience). Heidelberg: Springer.
60. Scherg, M., & Picton, T. W. (1991). Separation and identification of event-related potential components by brain electric source analysis. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, pp. 24-37.
61. Sereno, S. C., & Rayner, K. (2003). Measuring word recognition in reading: Eye movements and event-related potentials. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(11), 489-493. doi: 10. 1016/j. tics. 2003. 09. 010.
62. Sereno, S. C., Rayner, K., & Posner, M. I. (1998). Establishing a time-line of word recognition: Evidence from eye movements and event-related potentials. Neuroreport, 9(10), 2195-2200.
63. Streb, J., Hennighausen, E., & Rösler, F. (2004). Different anaphoric expressions are investigated by event-related brain potentials. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 33(3), 175-201.
64. Streb, J., Rösler, F., & Hennighausen, E. (1999). Event-related responses to pronoun and proper name anaphors in parallel and nonparallel discourse structures. Brain and Language, 70(2), 273-286.