The psychologist said quickly, "Dialogue descriptions modulate reading speed!"

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 41, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 137-151

  Stites, Mallory C ^a   Luke, Steven G ^b   Christianson, Kiel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Embodied cognition; Eye movements; Reading; Sentence processing

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COMPREHENSION; CONCEPT FORMATION; HUMAN; IMAGINATION; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS; SPEECH; TIME PERCEPTION; VERBAL BEHAVIOR;

ATTENTION; COMPREHENSION; CONCEPT FORMATION; HUMANS; IMAGINATION; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; TIME PERCEPTION; VERBAL BEHAVIOR;

EID: 84878906201     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: 15325946     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13421-012-0248-7     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Alexander, J. D., & Nygaard, L. C. (2008). Reading voices and hearing text: Talker-specific auditory imagery in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 34, 446-459.
2. Ashby, J., & Clifton, C., Jr. (2005). The prosodic property of lexical stress affects eye movements during silent reading. Cognition, 96, B89-B100.
3. Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge, U. K.: Cambridge University Press.
4. 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.
5. Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577-660. doi: 10. 1017/S0140525X99002149.
6. Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Dai, B. (2008). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes (R package version 0. 999375-28). Retrieved from http://lme4. r-forge. r-project. org/.
7. Clark, H. H., & Gerrig, R. J. (1990). Quotations as demonstrations. Language, 66, 764-805.
8. Drumm, A. M., & Klin, C. M. (2011). When story characters communicate: Readers' representations of characters' linguistic exchanges. Memory & Cognition, 39, 1348-1357. doi: 10. 3758/s13421-011-0096-x.
9. Fodor, J. (2002, April). Psycholinguistics cannot escape prosody. Paper presented at the SPEECH PROSODY 2002 Conference, Aix-en-Provence, France.
10. Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 558-565. doi: 10. 3758/BF03196313.
11. Hauk, O., Johnsrude, I., & Pulvermüller, F. (2004). Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron, 41, 301-307. doi: 10. 1016/S0896-6273(03)00838-9.
12. Huey, E. B. (1908). The psychology and pedagogy of reading, with a review of the history of reading and writing and of methods, texts, and hygiene in reading. New York, NY: Macmillan.
13. Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434-446. doi: 10. 1016/j. jml. 2007. 11. 007.
14. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329-354. doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 87. 4. 329.
15. Klin, C. M., & Drumm, A. M. (2010). Seeing what they read and hearing what they say: Readers' representation of the story characters' world. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 231-236. doi: 10. 3758/PBR. 17. 2. 231.
16. Kukona, A., Fang, S. Y., Aicher, K. A., Chen, H., & Magnuson, J. S. (2011). The time course of anticipatory constraint integration. Cognition, 119, 23-42.
17. R Development Core Team. (2011). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 2. 12. 2). Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from www. R-project. org.
18. Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1989). The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
19. Taylor, L. J., & Zwaan, R. A. (2008). Motor resonance and linguistic focus. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 896-904. doi: 10. 1080/17470210701625519.
20. Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Garnsey, S. (1994). Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 285-318.
21. Yao, B., Belin, P., & Scheepers, C. (2011). Silent reading of direct versus indirect speech activates voice-selective areas in the auditory cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 3146-3152. doi: 10. 1162/jocn_a_00022.
22. Yao, B., & Scheepers, C. (2011). Contextual modulation of reading rate for direct versus indirect speech quotations. Cognition, 121, 447-453. doi: 10. 1016/j. cognition. 2011. 08. 007.
23. Zwaan, R. A., & Taylor, L. J. (2006). Seeing, acting, understanding: Motor resonance in language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(1), 1-11.