Eye movements in reading words and sentences

Eye Movements

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 341-371

  Clifton, Charles ^a   Staub, Adrian ^a   Rayner, Keith ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84884850602     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1016/B978-008044980-7/50017-3     Document Type: Chapter

References (96)

1. Andrews S., Miller B., Rayner K. Eye movements and morphological segmentation of compound words: There is a mouse in mousetrap. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 2004, 16:285-311.
2. Ashby J., Rayner K., Clifton C.J. Eye movements of highly skilled and average readers: Differential effects of frequency and predictability. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2005, 58A:1065-1086.
3. Balota D.A., Pollatsek A., Rayner K. The interaction of contextual constraints and parafoveal visual information in reading. Cognitive Psychology 1985, 17:364-388.
4. Bever T.G. The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. Cognition and the development of language 1970, 279-352. Wiley, New York. J.R. Hayes (Ed.).
5. Boland J. Linking eye movements to sentence comprehension in reading and listening. The on-line study of sentence comprehension 2004, 51-76. Psychology Press, New York. M. Carreiras, C. Clifton (Eds.).
6. Carpenter P.A., Daneman M. Lexical retrieval and error recovery in reading: A model based on eye fixations. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1981, 28:138-160.
7. Chaffin R., Morris R.K., Seely R.E. Learning new word meanings from context: A study of eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 2001, 27:225-235.
8. Clifton C. On using eyetracking data to evaluate theories of on-line sentence processing: The case of reduced relative clauses. Invited talk, 12th European Conference on Eye Movements 2003.
9. Clifton C.J., Traxler M., Mohamed M.T., Williams R.S., Morris R.K., Rayner K. The use of thematic role information in parsing: Syntactic processing autonomy revisited. Journal of Memory and Language 2003, 49:317-334.
10. Coulson S., King J.W., Kutas M. Expect the unexpected: Event-related brain response to morphosyntactic violations. Language and Cognitive Processes 1998, 13:21-58.
11. Deutsch A., Bentin S. Syntactic and semantic factors in processing gender agreement in Hebrew: Evidence from ERPs and eye movement. Journal of Memory and Language 2001, 45:200-224.
12. Deutsch A., Frost R., Pollatsek A., Rayner K. Early morphological effects in word recognition: Evidence from parafoveal preview benefit. Language and Cognitive Processes 2000, 15:487-506.
13. Deutsch A., Frost R., Pollatsek A., Rayner K. Morphological parafoveal preview benefit effects in reading: Evidence from Hebrew. Language and Cognitive Processes 2005, 20:341-371.
14. Deutsch A., Frost R., Peleg S., Pollatsek A., Rayner K. Early morphological effects in reading: Evidence from parafoveal preview benefit in Hebrew. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2003, 10:415-422.
15. Duffy S.A., Morris R.K., Rayner K. Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of Memory and Language 1988, 27:429-446.
16. Ehrlich S.F., Rayner K. Contextual effects on word perception and eye movements during reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1981, 20:641-655.
17. Engbert R., Nuthmann A., Richter E., Kliegl R. SWIFT: A dynamical model of saccade generation during reading. Psychological Review 2005, 112:777-813.
18. Feng G. Eye movements as time series random variables: A stochastic model of eye movement control in reading. Cognitive Systems Research 2006, 7:70-95.
19. Ferreira F., Clifton C. The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language 1986, 25:348-368.
20. Folk J.R. Phonological codes are used to access the lexicon during silent reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1999, 25:892-906.
21. Folk J.R., Morris R.K. Effects of syntactic category assignment on lexical ambiguity resolution in reading: An eye movement analysis. Memory & Cognition 2003, 31:87-99.
22. Frazier L. Sentence processing: A tutorial review. Attention and performance 1987, 559-586. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ. M. Coltheart (Ed.).
23. Frazier L., Rayner K. Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology 1982, 14:178-210.
24. Frazier L., Rayner K. Resolution of syntactic category ambiguities: Eye movements in parsing lexically ambiguous sentences. Journal of Memory and Language 1987, 26:505-526.
25. Frazier L., Rayner K. Taking on semantic commitments: Processing multiple meanings vs multiple senses. Journal of Memory and Language 1990, 29:181-200.
26. Frisson S., Frazier L. Carving up word meaning: Portioning and grinding. Journal of Memory and Language 2005, 53:277-291.
27. Gibson E., Pearlmutter N.J. Distinguishing serial and parallel processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 2000, 29:231-240.
28. Hagoort P., Brown C., Groothusen J. The syntactic positive shift (SPS) as an ERP measure of syntactic processing. Language and Cognitive Processes 1993, 8:439-484.
29. Hahne A., Friederici A.D. Electrophysiological evidence for two steps in syntactic analysis: Early automatic and late controlled processes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1999, 11:194-205.
30. Henderson J.M., Ferreira F. 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 1990, 16:417-429.
31. Hyönä J., Pollatsek A. Reading Finnish compound words: Eye fixations are affected by component morphemes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1998, 24:1612-1627.
32. Inhoff A.W. Lexical access during eye fixations in reading: Are word access codes used to integrate lexical information across interword fixations?. Journal of Memory and Language 1989, 28:444-461.
33. Inhoff A.W., Rayner K. Parafoveal word processing during eye fixations in reading: Effects of word frequency. Perception & Psychophysics 1986, 40:431-439.
34. Jared D., Levy B.A., Rayner K. The role of phonology in the activation of word meanings during reading: Evidence from proofreading and eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1999, 128:2190264.
35. Johnson R., Perea M., Rayner K. Transposed letter effects in reading: Evidence from eye movements and parafoveal preview. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and performance 2007, in press.
36. Juhasz B.J. Age-of-acquisition effects in word and picture processing. Psychological Bulletin 2005, 131:684-712.
37. Juhasz B.J., Rayner K. Investigating the effects of a set of intercorrelated variables on eye fixation durations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2003, 29:1312-1318.
38. Juhasz B.J., Rayner K. The role of age-of-acquisition and word frequency in reading: Evidence from eye fixation durations. Visual Cognition 2006, 13:846-863.
39. Juhasz B.J., Starr M.S., Inhoff A.W., Placke L. The effects of morphology on the processing of compound words: Evidence from naming, lexical decisions and eye fixations. British Journal of Psychology 2003, 94:223-244.
40. Just M.A., Carpenter P. A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review 1980, 85:109-130.
41. Kambe G. Parafoveal processing of prefixed words during eye fixations in reading: Evidence against morphological influences on, parafoveal preprocessing. Perception & Psychophysics 2004, 66:279-292.
42. Kennison S.M., Clifton C. 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 1995, 21:68-81.
43. Kutas M., Hillyard S.A. Reading between the lines: Event-related brain potentials during natural sentence processing. Brain and Language 1980, 11:354-373.
44. Lewis R.L. Falsifying serial and parallel parsing models: Empirical conundrums and an overlooked paradigm. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 2000, 29:241-248.
45. Lima S.D. Morphological analysis in reading. Journal of Memory and Language 1987, 26:84-99.
46. MacDonald M.C., Pearlmutter N.J., Seidenberg M.S. The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Pyschological Review 1994, 101:676-703.
47. Marslen-Wilson W.D. Linguistic structure and speech shadowing at very short latencies. Nature 1973, 244:522-523.
48. McDonald S.A., Carpenter R.H.S., Shillcock R.C. An anatomically-constrained, stochastic model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review 2005, 112:814-840.
49. McRae K., Spivey-Knowlton M.J., Tanenhaus M.K. Modeling the influence of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 1998, 38:283-312.
50. Munte T.F., Heinze H.J., Mangun G.R. Dissociation of brain activity related to syntactic and semantic aspects of language. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1993, 5:335-344.
51. Murray W.S., Rowan M. Early, mandatory, pragmatic processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 1998, 27:1-22.
52. Neville H., Nicol J.L., Barss A., Forster K.I., Garrett M.F. Syntactically based sentence processing classes: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1991, 3:152-165.
53. Ni W., Crain S., Shankweiler D. Sidestepping garden paths: Assessing the contributions of syntax, semantics and plausibility in resolving ambiguities. Language and Cognitive Processes 1996, 11:283-334.
54. Ni W., Fodor J.D., Crain S., Shankweiler D. Anomaly detection: Eye movement patterns. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 1998, 27:515-540.
55. Osterhout L., McKinnon R., Bersick M., Corey V. On the language specificity of the brain response to syntactic anomalies: Is the syntactic positive shift a member of the P300 family?. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1996, 8:507-526.
56. Osterhout L., Mobley L.A. Event-related brain potentials elicited by failure to agree. Journal of Memory and Language 1995, 34:739-773.
57. Pickering M.J., Frisson S. Processing ambiguous verbs: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2001, 27:556-573.
58. Pickering M., McElree B., Traxler M. The difficulty of coercion: A response to de Almeida. Brain and Language 2005, 93:1-9.
59. Pollatsek A., Hyönä J. The role of semantic transparency in the processing of Finnish compound words. Language and Cognitive Processes 2005, 20:261-290.
60. Pollatsek A., Hyönä J., Bertram R. The role of morphological constituents in reading Finnish compound words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2000, 26:820-833.
61. Pollatsek A., Reichle E.D., Rayner K. Modeling eye movements in reading: Extensions of the E-Z Reader model. The mind's eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research 2003, 361-390. North Holland, Amsterdam. J. Hyönä, R. Radach, H. Deubel (Eds.).
62. Pollatsek A., Reichle E., Rayner K. Tests of the E-Z Reader model: Exploring the interface between cognition and eye-movement control. Cognitive Psychology 2006, 52:1-56.
63. Rayner K. Visual attention in reading: Eye movements reflect cognitive processes. Memory & Cognition 1977, 4:443-448.
64. Rayner K. Eye movements in reading and information processing. Psychological Bulletin 1978, 85:618-660.
65. Rayner K. Eye movements and cognitive processes in reading, visual search, and scene perception. Eye movement research: Mechanisms, processes and applications 1995, 3-22. North-Holland Press, Amsterdam. J.M. Findlay, R. Walker, R.W. Kentridge (Eds.).
66. Rayner K. Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin 1998, 124:372-422.
67. Rayner K., Ashby J., Pollatsek A., Reichle E. 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 2004, 30:720-732.
68. Rayner K., Carlson M., Frazier L. The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1983, 22:358-374.
69. Rayner K., Cook A.E., Juhasz B.J., Frazier L. Immediate disambiguation of lexically ambiguous words during reading: Evidence from eye movements. British Journal of Psychology 2006, 97:467-482.
70. Rayner K., Duffy S. Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory & Cognition 1986, 14:191-201.
71. Rayner K., Frazier L. Selection mechanisms in reading lexically ambiguous words. Journal of Experimental psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1989, 15:779-790.
72. Rayner K., Liversedge S.P., White S.J., Vergilino-Perez D. Reading disappearing text: Cognitive control of eye movements. Psychological Science 2003, 14:385-389.
73. Rayner K., Pollatsek A., Binder K. Phonological codes and eye movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1998, 24:476-497.
74. Rayner K., Raney G., Pollatsek A. Eye movements and discourse processing. Sources of coherence in reading 1995, 9-36. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. R.F. Lorch, E.J. O'Brien (Eds.).
75. Rayner K., Sereno S.C. Eye movements in reading: Psycholinguistic studies. Handbook of psycholinguistics 1994, 57-81. Academic Press, San Diego. M.A. Gernsbacher (Ed.).
76. Rayner K., Sereno S., Morris R., Schmauder R., Clifton C.J. Eye movements and on-line language comprehension processes. Language and Cognitive Processes 1989, 4(SI):21-50.
77. Rayner K., Warren T., Juhasz B.J., Liversedge S.P. The effect of plausibility on eye movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 2004, 30:1290-1301.
78. Rayner K., Well A.D. Effects of contextual constraint on eye movements in reading: A further examination. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1996, 3:504-509.
79. Reichle E.D., Pollatsek A., Fisher D.F., Rayner K. Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review 1998, 105:125-156.
80. Reichle E.D., Pollatsek A., Rayner K. E-Z Reader: A cognitive-control, serial-attention model of eye-movement behavior during reading. Cognitive Systems Research 2006, 7:4-22.
81. Reichle E.D., Rayner K., Pollatsek A. Eye movement control in reading: Accounting for initial fixation locations and refixations within the E-Z Reader model. Vision Research 1999, 39:4403-4411.
82. Reichle E.D., Rayner K., Pollatsek A. The E-Z Reader model of eye-movement control in reading: Comparisons to other models. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2003, 26:445-476.
83. Reilly R., Radach R. Some empirical tests of an interactive activation model of eye movement control in reading. Cognitive Systems Research 2006, 7:34-55.
84. Ross J.R. Constraints on Variables in Syntax 1967, Unpublished Dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
85. Schroyens W., Vitu F., Brysbaert M., d'Ydewalle G. Eye movement control during reading: Foveal load and parafoveal processing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1999, 52A:1021-1046.
86. Seidenberg M.S., Tanenhaus M., Leiman J., Bienkowski M. Automatic access of the meanings of ambiguous words in context: Some limitations of knowledge-based processing. Cognitive Psychology 1982, 4:489-537.
87. Sereno S.C., O'Donnell P., Rayner K. Eye movements and lexical ambiguity resolution: Investigating the subordinate bias effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2006, 32:335-350.
88. Spivey M.J., Tanenhaus M.K. Syntactic ambiguity resolution in discourse: Modeling the effects of referential context and lexical frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1998, 24:1521-1543.
89. Tannehaus M.K., Donnenwerth-Nolan S. Syntactic context and lexical access. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1984, 36A:649-661.
90. Tanenhaus M.K., Leiman J.M., Seibenderg M.S. Evidence for multiple stages in the processing of ambiguous words in syntactic contexts. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1979, 18:427-440.
91. Traxler M., Pickering M., Clifton C. Adjunct attachment is not a form of lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language 1998, 39:558-592.
92. Traxler M., Pickering M.J., McElree B. Coercion in sentence processing: Evidence from eye movements and self-paced reading. Journal of Memory and Language 2002, 47:530-548.
93. Trueswell J.C., Tanenhaus M.K., Garnsey S.M. Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic disambiguation. Journal of Memory and Language 1994, 33:285-318.
94. White S.J., Rayner K., Liversedge S.P. Eye movements and the modulation of parafoveal processing by foveal processing difficulty: A re-examination. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2005, 12:891-896.
95. Williams R.S., Morris R.K. Eye movements, word familiarity, and vocabulary acquisition. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 2004, 16:312-339.
96. Yang S. An aculomotor-based model of eye movements in reading: The competition/activation model. Cognitive Systems Research 2006, 7:56-69.