Saccade launch site as a predictor of fixation durations in reading: Comments on Hand, Miellet, O'Donnell, and Sereno (2010)

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 251-261

  Slattery, Timothy J ^a   Staub, Adrian ^b   Rayner, Keith ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH ALABAMA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Eye movements; Linear mixed models; Reading; Word frequency; Word predictability

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; EYE FIXATION; HUMAN; LINGUISTICS; META ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; READING; SACCADIC EYE MOVEMENT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; TIME;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; FIXATION, OCULAR; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; READING; SACCADES; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84858622899     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0025980     Document Type: Note

References (39)

1. Allison, P. D. (2002). Missing data. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2. Altarriba, J., Kroll, J. F., Sholl, A., & Rayner, K. (1996). The influence of lexical and conceptual constraints on reading mixed language sentences: Evidence from eye fixation and naming times. Memory & Cognition, 24, 477-492. doi:10.3758/BF03200936
3. Ashby, J., Rayner, K., & Clifton, C. (2005). Eye movements of highly skilled and average readers: Differential effects of frequency and predictability. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology, 58, 1065-1086. doi:10.1080/02724980443000476
4. Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
5. Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390-412. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
6. Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Dai, B. (2009). Lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R Package Version 0.999375-32.
7. Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 41, 977-990. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.977
8. Davies, M. (2008). The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 425 million words, 1990-present. Available online at http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/
9. Demberg, V., & Keller, F. (2008). Data from eye-tracking corpora as evidence for theories of syntactic processing complexity. Cognition, 109, 193-210. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.008
10. Engbert, R., Nuthmann, A., Richter, E., & Kliegl, R. (2005). SWIFT: A dynamical model of saccade generation during reading. Psychological Review, 112, 777-813. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.777
11. Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of the mind. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
12. Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2007). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
13. Gollan, T. H., Slattery, T. J., Goldenberg, D., van Assche, E., Duyck, W., & Rayner, K. (2011). Frequency drives lexical access in reading but not in speaking: The frequency lag hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 186-209. doi:10.1037/a0022256
14. Haitovsky, Y. (1968). Missing data in regression analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B,30, 67-82.
15. Hand, C. J., Miellet, S., O'Donnell, P. J., & Sereno, S. C. (2010). The frequency-predictability interaction in reading: It depends on where you're coming from. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 1294-1313.
16. Lavigne, F., Vitu, F., & d'Ydewalle, G. (2000). The influence of semantic context on initial landing sites in words. Acta Psychologica, 104, 191-214. doi:10.1016/S0001-6918(00)00020-2
17. Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York, NY: Wiley
18. Luke, D. A. (2004). Multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19. Miellet, S., Sparrow, L., & Sereno, S. C. (2007). Word frequency and predictability effects in reading French: An evaluation of the E-Z Reader model. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 762-769. doi: 10.3758/BF03196834
20. 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, 1-56. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych .2005.06.001
21. Quené, H., & van den Bergh, H. (2004). On multi-level modeling of data from repeated measures designs: A tutorial. Speech Communication, 43, 103-121. doi:10.1016/j.specom.2004.02.004
22. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23. Rayner, K. (1975). The perceptual span and peripheral cues in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 65-81. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(75)90005-5
24. Rayner, K. (1978). Foveal and parafoveal cues in reading. In J. Requin (Ed), Attention and performance (Vol 7, pp 149-162). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. Rayner, K. (2009). The Thirty Fifth Sir Frederick Bartlett Lecture: Eye movements and attention during reading, scene perception, and visual search. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1457-1506. doi:10.1080/17470210902816461
26. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372
27. Rayner, K., Ashby, J., Pollatsek, A., & Reichle, E. D. (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. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.30.4.720
28. Rayner, K., Binder, K. S., Ashby, J., & Pollatsek, A. (2001). Eye movement control in reading: Word predictability has little influence on initial landing positions in words. Vision Research, 41, 943-954. doi:10.1016/ S0042-6989(00)00310-2
29. Rayner, K., Mcconkie, G. W., & Ehrlich, S. (1978). Eye movements and integrating information across fixations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4, 529-544. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.4.4.529
30. Rayner, K., Mcconkie, G. W., & Zola, D. (1980). Integrating information across eye movements. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 206-226. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(80)90009-2
31. R Development Core Team. (2010). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org
32. Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., Fisher, D. L., & Rayner, K. (1998). Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review, 105, 125-157. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.105.1.125
33. Reilly, R., & Radach, R. (2006). Some empirical tests of an interactive activation model of eye movement control in reading. Cognitive Systems Research, 7, 34-55. doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2005.07.006
34. Schafer, J. L. (1997). Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. London, U.K.: Chapman & Hall.
35. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1979). Mechanisms of sentence context effects in reading: Automatic activation and conscious attention. Memory & Cognition, 7, 77-85. doi:10.3758/BF03197588
36. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1981). The effect of sentence context on ongoing word recognition: Tests of a two-process theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 658-672. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.7.3.658
37. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1983). On priming by a sentence context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112, 1-36. doi:10.1037/ 0096-3445.112.1.1
38. Staub, A. (2010). Eye movements and processing difficulty in object relative clauses. Cognition, 116, 71-86. doi:10.1016/j.cognition .2010.04.002
39. Staub, A. (2011). The effect of lexical predictability on distributions of eye fixation durations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 371-376. doi: 10.3758/s13423-010-0046-9