Exploring the lack of a disfluency effect: evidence from eye movements

Metacognition and Learning

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 71-88

  Strukelj, Alexander ^a   Scheiter, Katharina ^b   Nyström, Marcus ^a   Holmqvist, Kenneth ^a  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Desirable difficulty; Disfluency effect; Effort regulation; Eye tracking; Low pass filtering; Reading comprehension; Working memory capacity

Indexed keywords

EID: 84946107298     PISSN: 15561623     EISSN: 15561631     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11409-015-9146-2     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390–412. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005.
2. Bates, D., Mächler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software.
3. Becker, C. A., & Killion, T. H. (1977). Interaction of visual and cognitive effects in word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3(3), 389–401. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.3.3.389.
4. Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823.
5. Chung, S. T. L., Jarvis, S. H., & Cheung, S.-H. (2007). The effect of dioptric blur on reading performance. Vision Research, 47(12), 1584–1594. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2007.03.007.
6. Clifton, C., Staub, A., & Rayner, K. (2007). Eye movements in reading words and sentences. In R. P. G. Van Gompel, M. H. Fischer, W. S. Murray, & R. L. Hill (Eds.), Eye movements: A window on mind and brain (pp. 341–371). Elsevier Ltd. http://doi.org/10.1016/b978-008044980-7/50017-3.
7. Conway, A. R. A., Kane, M. J., Bunting, M. F., Hambrick, D. Z., Wilhelm, O., & Engle, R. W. (2005). Working memory span tasks: a methodological review and user’s guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(5), 769–786. doi:10.3758/bf03196772.
8. Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(4), 450–466. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6.
9. Daneman, M., & Merikle, P. M. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: a meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3(4), 422–433. doi:10.3758/BF03214546.
10. Diemand-Yauman, C., Oppenheimer, D. M., & Vaughan, E. B. (2011). Fortune favors the bold (and the italicized): effects of disfluency on educational outcomes. Cognition, 118(1), 111–115. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2010.09.012.
11. Ehmke, C., & Wilson, S. (2007). Identifying web usability problems from eye-tracking data. In Proceedings of the 21st British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: HCI… but not as we know it. Volume 1 (pp. 119–128). British Computer Society. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1531294.1531311
12. Eitel, A., Scheiter, K., Schüler, A., Nyström, M., & Holmqvist, K. (2013). How a picture facilitates the process of learning from text: evidence for scaffolding. Learning and Instruction, 28, 48–63. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.05.002.
13. Eitel, A., Kühl, T., Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2014). Disfluency meets cognitive load in multimedia learning: does harder-to-read mean better-to-understand? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28(4), 488–501. doi:10.1002/acp.3004.
14. French, M. M. J., Blood, A., Bright, N. D., Futak, D., Grohmann, M. J., Hasthorpe, A.,.. Tabor, J. (2013). Changing fonts in education: how the benefits vary with ability and dyslexia. The Journal of Educational Research, 106, 301–304. doi:10.1080/00220671.2012.736430.
15. Holcomb, P. J. (1993). Semantic priming and stimulus degradation: implications for the role of the N400 in language processing. Psychophysiology, 30(1), 47–61. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1993.tb03204.x.
16. Hooge, I. T. C., & Erkelens, C. J. (1999). Peripheral vision and Oculomotor control during visual search. Vision Research, 39(8), 1567–1575. doi:10.1016/S0042-6989(98)00213-2.
17. Hyönä, J., Lorch, R. F., & Rinck, M. (2003). Eye movement measures to study global text processing. In R. Radach, J. Hyönä, & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind’s eye: cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 313–334). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. doi:10.1016/b978-044451020-4/50018-9.
18. Ilkowska, M., & Engle, R. W. (2010). Working memory capacity and self-regulation. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of personality and self-regulation (pp. 265–290). Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781444318111.ch12.
19. Jainta, S., Dehnert, A., Heinrich, S. P., & Jaschinski, W. (2011). Binocular coordination during reading of blurred and nonblurred text. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 52(13), 9416–9424. doi:10.1167/iovs.11-8237.
20. Johnson, C. I., & Mayer, R. E. (2012). An eye movement analysis of the spatial contiguity effect in multimedia learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 18, 178–191. doi:10.1037/a0026923.
21. Jordan, T. R., McGowan, V. A., & Paterson, K. B. (2012). Reading with a filtered fovea: the influence of visual quality at the point of fixation during reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(6), 1078–1084. doi:10.3758/s13423-012-0307-x.
22. Kane, M. J., Bleckley, M. K., Conway, A. R. A., & Engle, R. W. (2001). A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(2), 169–183. doi:10.1037//0096-3445.130.2.169.
23. Kühl, T., & Eitel, A. (in press). Effects of disfluency on cognitive and metacognitive processes and outcomes. Metacognition and Learning.
24. Legge, G. E., & Cheung, S. (2004). 49.1: Invited Paper: Psychophysics of reading: Implications for displaying text. In SID Symposium Digest of Technical Papers (Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 1359-1361). Society for Information Display. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. doi:10.1889/1.1825762
25. Legge, G. E., Pelli, D. G., Rubin, G. S., & Schleske, M. M. (1985). Psychophysics of reading: I. Normal vision. Vision Research, 25(2), 239–252. doi:10.1016/0042-6989(85)90117-8.
26. Lehmann, Goussios, C., & Seufert, T. (in press). Working memory capacity and disfluency effect: An aptitude-treatment-interaction study. Metacognition and Learning.
27. Mason, L., Tornatora, M. C., & Pluchino, P. (2013). Do fourth graders integrate text and picture in processing and learning from an illustrated science text? Evidence from eye-movement patterns. Computers & Education, 60, 95–109. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.011.
28. Mautone, P. D., & Mayer, R. E. (2001). Signaling as a cognitive guide in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 377. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.93.2.377.
29. Meyer, A., Frederick, S., Burnham, T. C., Guevara Pinto, J. D., Boyer, T. W., Ball, L. J., & Schuldt, J. P. (2015). Disfluent fonts don’t help people solve math problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(2), e16–e30. doi:10.1037/xge0000049.
30. R Development Core Team. (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from: http://www.r-project.org/. Retrieved from http://www.r-project.org/ (Version 3.0.3)
31. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372–422. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372.
32. Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457–1506. doi:10.1080/17470210902816461.
33. 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(3), 191–201. doi:10.3758/bf03197692.
34. Rayner, K., Smith, T. J., Malcolm, G. L., & Henderson, J. M. (2009). Eye movements and visual encoding during scene perception. Psychological Science, 20(1), 6–10. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02243.x.
35. Rehder, B., & Hoffman, A. B. (2005). Eyetracking and selective attention in category learning. Cognitive Psychology, 51(1), 1–41. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2004.11.001.
36. Rehder, B., Colner, R. M., & Hoffman, A. B. (2009). Feature inference learning and eyetracking. Journal of Memory and Language, 60(3), 393–419. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2008.12.001.
37. Reingold, E. M., & Rayner, K. (2006). Examining the word identification stages hypothesized by the E-Z reader model. Psychological Science, 17(9), 742–746. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01775.x.
38. Scheiter, K., & Eitel, A. (2015). Signals foster multimedia learning by supporting integration of highlighted text and diagram elements. Learning and Instruction, 36, 11–26. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.11.002.
39. Schwonke, R., Berthold, K., & Renkl, A. (2009). How multiple external representations are used and how they can be made more useful. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 1227–1243. doi:10.1002/acp.1526.
40. Unsworth, N., & Engle, R. W. (2005). Individual differences in working memory capacity and learning: evidence from the serial reaction time task. Memory & Cognition, 33(2), 213–220. doi:10.3758/bf03195310.
41. Unsworth, N., Heitz, R. P., Schrock, J. C., & Engle, R. W. (2005). An automated version of the operation span task. Behavior Research Methods, 37(3), 498–505. doi:10.3758/BF03192720.
42. Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sluijsmans, D. M. A. (2009). Toward a synthesis of cognitive load theory, four-component instructional design, and self-directed learning. Educational Psychology Review, 21, 55–66. doi:10.1007/s10648-008-9092-5.
43. Yue, C. L., Castel, A. D., & Bjork, R. A. (2013). When disfluency is—and is not—a desirable difficulty: the influence of typeface clarity on metacognitive judgments and memory. Memory & Cognition, 41, 229–241. doi:10.3758/s13421-012-0255-8.