Dissociating preview validity and preview difficulty in parafoveal processing of word n + 1 during reading

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 653-668

  Risse, Sarah ^a   Kliegl, Reinhold ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF POTSDAM   (Germany)

Author keywords

Display change awareness; Eye movements; Parafoveal preview benefit; Parafoveal on foveal effect; Perceptual span

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; DEVICES; EYE FIXATION; EYE MOVEMENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; OCULOGRAPHY; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; READING; RETINA FOVEA; TIME; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; EYE MOVEMENT MEASUREMENTS; EYE MOVEMENTS; FEMALE; FIXATION, OCULAR; FOVEA CENTRALIS; HUMANS; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; READING; TIME FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84897960994     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0034997     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Arbuthnott, K. D. (2008). Asymmetric switch cost and backward inhibition: Carryover activation and inhibition in switching between tasks of unequal difficulty. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/ Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 62, 91-100.
2. Balota, D. A., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1985). The interaction of contextual constraints and parafoveal visual information in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 364 -390.
3. Bates, D., & Maechler, M. (2010). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999375-35. http://CRAN.Rproject.org/package_lme4
4. Bock, M. (1989). Lesen in Abhängigkeit von der Groβ- und Kleinschreibung. [Reading depending on capital and small letters]. Sprache & Kognition, 8, 133-151.
5. Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433-436.
6. Chace, K. H., Rayner, K., & Well, A. D. (2005). Eye movements and phonological parafoveal preview: Effects of reading skill. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 59, 209-217.
7. Cornelissen, F. W., Peters, E., & Palmer, J. (2002). The eyelink toolbox: Eye tracking with MATLAB and the Psychophysics Toolbox. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 34, 613- 617.
8. Dambacher, M., Rolfs, M., Göllner, K., Kliegl, R., & Jacobs, A. (2009). Event-related potentials reveal rapid verification of predicted visual input. PLoS One, 4, e5047.
9. Drieghe, D. (2011). Parafoveal-on-foveal effects on eye-movements during reading. In S. P. Liversedge, I. D. Gilchrist, & S. Everling (Eds.), Eye movements handbook (pp. 839-855). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
10. Drieghe, D., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2008). Mislocated fixations can account for parafoveal-on-foveal effects in eye movements during reading. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 1239-1249.
11. Engbert, R., & Kliegl, R. (2001). Mathematical models of eye movements in reading: A possible role for autonomous saccades. Biological Cybernetics, 85, 77-87.
12. Engbert, R., & Kliegl, R. (2003). Microsaccades uncover the orientation of covert attention. Vision Research, 43, 1035-1045.
13. Engbert, R., Longtin, A., & Kliegl, R. (2002). A dynamical model of saccade generation in reading based on spatially distributed lexical processing. Vision Research, 42, 621- 636.
14. Engbert, R., & Mergenthaler, K. (2006). Microsaccades are triggered by low retinal image slip. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103, 7192-7197.
15. Engbert, R., Nuthmann, A., Richter, E., & Kliegl, R. (2005). SWIFT: A dynamical model of saccade generation during reading. Psychological Review, 112, 777-813.
16. Foxe, J. J., & Simpson, G. V. (2002). Flow of activation from V1 to frontal cortex in humans: A framework for defining "early" visual processing. Experimental Brain Research, 142, 139-150.
17. Geyken, A. (2007). The DWDS-Corpus: A reference corpus for the German language of the 20th century. In C. Fellbaum (Ed.), Collocations and idioms: Linguistic, lexicographic, and computational aspects (pp. 23-40). London, UK: Continuum Press.
18. Heister, J., Würzner, K. M., Bubenzer, J., Pohl, E., Hanneforth, T., Geyken, A., & Kliegl, R. (2011). dlexDB - Eine lexikalische Datenbank für die psychologische und linguistische Forschung. Psychologische Rundschau, 62, 10-20.
19. Henderson, J. M., Dixon, P., Petersen, A., Twilley, L., & Ferreira, F. (1995). Evidence for the use of phonological representations during transsaccadic word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 82-97.
20. 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, 417-429.
21. Hohenstein, S., & Kliegl, R. (in press). Semantic preview benefit during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition.
22. Hyönä, J. (2011). Foveal and parafoveal processing during reading. In: S. P. Liversedge, I. D. Gilchrist, & S. Everling (Eds.), Eye movements handbook (pp. 819-838). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
23. 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.
24. Inhoff, A. W. (1990). Integrating information across eye fixations in reading. Acta Psychologica, 73, 281-297.
25. 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, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
26. Inhoff, A. W., & Rayner, K. (1980). Parafoveal word perception: A case against semantic preprocessing. Perception & Psychophysics, 27, 457- 464.
27. 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.
28. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329-354.
29. Kennedy, A. (2000). Parafoveal processing in word recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A, 429-455.
30. Kennedy, A., Pynte, J., & Ducrot, S. (2002). Parafoveal-on-foveal interactions in word recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 55, 1307-1337.
31. Kliegl, R., Mayr, U., Junker, M., & Fanselow, G. (1999). Testing age invariance in language processes. In S. Kemper & R. Kliegl (Eds.), Constraints on language: Aging, grammar, and memory (pp. 137-167). New York, NY: Springer.
32. 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, 12-35.
33. Kliegl, R., Risse, S., & Laubrock, J. (2007). Preview benefit and parafoveal-on-foveal effects from word n_2. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1250-1255.
34. Koenker, R. (2005). Qantile regression. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
35. Koenker, R. (2011). quantreg: Quantile regression. R package version 4.92. http://CRAN.Rproject.org/package_quantreg
36. Kuperman, V., Dambacher, M., Nuthmann, A., & Kliegl, R. (2010). The effect of word position on eye-movements in sentence and paragraph reading. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 1838- 1857.
37. Liversedge, S. P., Rayner, K., White, S. J., Vergilino-Perez, D., Findlay, J. M., & Kentridge, R. W. (2004). Eye movements when reading disappearing text: Is there a gap effect in reading? Vision Research, 44, 1013-1024.
38. Masson, M. E. J., & Kliegl, R. (2013). Modulation of additive and interactive effects in lexical decision by trial history. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 898-914.
39. McConkie, G. W., & Rayner, K. (1975). The span of the effective stimulus during a fixation in reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 17, 578-586.
40. McDonald, S. A., Carpenter, R. H. S., & Shillcock, R. C. (2005). An anatomically constrained, stochastic model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review, 112, 814-840.
41. Miellet, S., & Sparrow, L. (2004). Phonological codes are assembled before word fixation: Evidence from boundary paradigm in sentence reading. Brain and Language, 90, 299 -310.
42. 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, 667-682.
43. Pelli, D. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437-442.
44. Perea, M., & Pollatsek, A. (1998). The effects of neighborhood frequency in reading and lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 767-779.
45. Pollatsek, A., Lesch, M., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1992). Phonological codes are used in integrating information across saccades in word identification and reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 148-162.
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, 1-56.
47. Pynte, J., Kennedy, A., & Ducrot, S. (2004). The influence of parafoveal typographical errors on eye movements in reading. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16, 178-202.
48. Rayner, K. (1975). The perceptual span and peripheral cues in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 65-81.
49. Rayner, K., Balota, D. A., & Pollatsek, A. (1986). Against parafoveal semantic preprocessing during eye fixations in reading. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 40, 473-483.
50. Rayner, K., & Duffy, S. A. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory & Cognition, 14, 191-201.
51. Rayner, K., Liversedge, S. P., & White, S. J. (2006). Eye movements when reading disappearing text: The importance of the word to the right of fixation. Vision Research, 46, 310-323.
52. 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.
53. Rayner, K., Warren, T., Juhasz, B. J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2004). The effect of plausibility on eye movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 1290-1301.
54. Rayner, K., Well, A. D., & Pollatsek, A. (1980). Asymmetry of the effective visual field in reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 27, 537- 544.
55. R Development Core Team. (2010). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for statistical computing. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org
56. 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.
57. 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- 476.
58. Reilly, R. G., & Radach, R. (2006). Some empirical tests of an interactive activation model of eye movement control in reading. Cognitive Systems Research, 7, 34-55.
59. Reingold, E. M., Reichle, E. D., Glaholt, M. G., & Sheridan, H. (2012). Direct lexical control of eye movements in reading: Evidence from a survival analysis of fixation durations. Cognitive Psychology, 65, 177- 206.
60. Risse, S., & Kliegl, R. (2011). Adult age differences in the perceptual span during reading. Psychology and Aging, 26, 451-460.
61. Risse, S., & Kliegl, R. (2012). Evidence for delayed parafoveal-on-foveal effects from word n+2 in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 1026-1042.
62. Schad, D. J., & Engbert, R. (2012). The zoom lens of attention: Simulating shuffled versus normal text reading using the SWIFT model. Visual Cognition, 20(4 -5):391- 421.
63. Schotter, E. R., Angele, B., & Rayner, K. (2012). Parafoveal processing in reading. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74, 5-35.
64. Schroyens, W., Vitu, F., Brysbaert, M., & d'Ydewalle, G. (1999). Eye movement control during reading: Foveal load and parafoveal processing. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52A, 1021- 1046.
65. Shaffer, J. P. (1977). Reorganization of variables in analysis of variance and multidimensional contingency tables. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 220-228.
66. Slattery, T. J., Angele, B., & Rayner, K. (2011). Eye movements and display change detection during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 1924-1938.
67. Stine-Morrow, E. A., Shake, M. C., Miles, J. R., Lee, K., Gao, X., & McConkie, G. (2010). Pay now or pay later: Aging and the role of boundary salience in self-regulation of conceptual integration in sentence processing. Psychology and Aging, 25, 168-176.
68. Trukenbrod, H. A., & Engbert, R. (submitted). ICAT: A computational model for the adaptive control of fixation durations.
69. Vitu, F., Brysbaert, M., & Lancelin, D. (2004). A test of parafoveal-onfoveal effects with pairs of orthographically related words. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16, 154 -177.
70. White, S. J. (2008). Eye movement control during reading: Effects of word frequency and orthographic familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 205-223.
71. 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.
72. Williams, C. C., Perea, M., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2006). Previewing the neighborhood: The role of orthographic neighbors as parafoveal previews in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 1072-1082.
73. Wotschack, C., & Kliegl, R. (2013). Reading strategy modulates parafoveal-on-foveal effects in sentence reading. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 548-562.
74. Yan, M., Zhou, W., Shu, H., & Kliegl, R. (2012). Lexical and sublexical semantic preview benefits in Chinese reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 1069-1075.