Children's and adults' parafoveal processes in German: Phonological and orthographic effects

Tiffin‐Richards, Simon P.; Schroeder, Sascha

doi:10.1080/20445911.2014.999076

Cited by 67 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, we found that children made more first pass fixations on these words than the adults did. This finding of more, and longer, fixations is consistent with research showing that lexical processing is, overall, slower in children compared to adults (Blythe, 2014;Blythe, Häikiö, Bertam, Liversedge, & Hyönä, 2011;Mancheva et al, 2015;Reichle et al, 2013;Tiffin-Richards & Schroeder, 2015;Zang, Liang, Bai, Yan, & Liversedge, 2012). Such a change in lexical identification, as indexed by eye movement behavior, may be associated with developmental changes in the quality of cognitive lexical representations as per Perfetti's Lexical Quality Hypothesis (Perfetti, 2007;Perfetti & Hart, 2001.…”

Section: Developmental Changes In Lexical Identificationsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…In addition, the size of the transposed letter effect has been found to be greater when the manipulated letters are internal (29 ms) than when they are external (9 ms; Perea & Lupker, 2003a, 2003b. Similarly, evidence from silent sentence reading has shown that the cost associated with reading directly fixated transposed letter strings decreased for internal letter manipulations compared with those involving initial or final letters (Rayner et al, 2006); specifically, the greatest cost to reading times occurred in those sentences where initial letters were transposed in comparison to internal letters (Johnson, 2007;Johnson & Dunne, 2012;Johnson & Eisler, 2012;White et al, 2008; see also Briihl & Inhoff, 1995;Jordan, Thomas, Patching, & Scott-Brown, 2003;Plummer & Rayner, 2012;Rayner et al, 1980;Tiffin-Richards & Schroeder, 2015). Finally, Johnson et al (2007) used the boundary paradigm to manipulate the parafoveal preview of internal versus final letters (Experiment 2) and initial versus final letters (Experiment 3).…”

Section: Internal Versus External Letter Transpositionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only one study in German by Tiffin-Richards and Schroeder (2015), using the boundary paradigm, has examined the transposed letter effect in children compared with adults during sentence reading. They found that 8 -9 years old children showed a transposed letter effect when the letters manipulated were in Position 12 ("Arnd" vs. "Urnd"-Rand [base word]) and 23 ("Rnad" vs. "Rcod") in single fixation duration; however, the effect was not found in any other measure and they argue that it should be "interpreted with caution" given that beginning readers make relatively few single fixations when reading.…”

Section: The Transposed Letter Effect In Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Parafoveal preprocessing of word initial trigrams during reading in adults and children.

Pagán

Blythe

Liversedge

2016

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although previous research has shown that letter position information for the first letter of a parafoveal word is encoded less flexibly than internal word beginning letters (Johnson, Perea & Rayner, 2007;White et al., 2008), it is not clear how positional encoding operates over the initial trigram in English. This experiment explored the preprocessing of letter identity and position information of a parafoveal word's initial trigram by adults and children using the boundary paradigm during normal sentence reading. Seven previews were generated: Identity (captain); transposed letter and substituted letter nonwords in Positions 1 and 2 (acptain-imptain); 1 and 3 (pactain-gartain), and 2 and 3 (cpatain-cgotain). Results showed a transposed letter effect (TLE) in Position 13 for gaze duration in the pretarget word; and TLE in Positions 12 and 23 but not in Position 13 in the target word for both adults and children. These findings suggest that children, similar to adults, extract letter identity and position information flexibly using a spatial coding mechanism; supporting isolated word recognition models such as SOLAR (Davis, 1999(Davis, , 2010 and SERIOL (Whitney, 2001) models.Keywords: letter position encoding, parafoveal preview, eye movements, childrenThe purpose of this study was to examine how letter identity and position information are encoded during lexical identification in sentence reading by children and adults. Specifically, in this study, parafoveal preprocessing of letter identity and position information in a word's initial trigram by children and adults during silent sentence reading was explored. Parafoveal Preprocessing in Children and AdultsResearch in parafoveal preprocessing in adults, using gazecontingent change paradigms (McConkie & Rayner, 1975;Rayner, 1975), has shown that readers not only process the fixated word but also extract some visual and linguistic information from the next word in the sentence, before it is directly fixated (see Schotter, Angele, & Rayner, 2012 for a review). Studies using the moving window paradigm have shown that in skilled readers, the effective visual field in reading (the perceptual span) extends over an asymmetrical area from 3-4 characters spaces to the left of the fixated word to 14 -15 character spaces to the right of fixation in alphabetic languages (McConkie & Rayner, 1975). Word identification occurs in the area closest to fixation (between 3 and 4 letters to the left and 6 or 7 letters to the right of fixation; Rayner & Bertera, 1979;Rayner, Inhoff, Morrison, Slowiaczek, & Bertera, 1981).With respect to the size of the effective visual field in reading for children, studies have shown that the perceptual span increases with age. Thus, 7-to 9-year-old children were found to have a perceptual span of 3 to 4 letter spaces to the left of fixation and 11 letters to the right; while the span was 3 to 4 letters spaces to the left and 14 letters to the right of fixation in 11-year-old children (Häikiö, Bertram, Hyönä & Niemi, 2009;Rayner, 1986;Sperlich, Sch...

show abstract

Section: Developmental Changes In Lexical Identificationsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Internal Versus External Letter Transpositionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Transposed Letter Effect In Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Parafoveal preprocessing of word initial trigrams during reading in adults and children.

Pagán

Blythe

Liversedge

2016

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The transposed-letter effect refers to the finding that nonwords created by transposing adjacent letters in a word (e.g., "very" transposed to "vrey") are often misclassified as words (21). Indeed, transposed-letter effects are generally only observed in children who have acquired some literacy skills (22) and are not displayed by illiterate adults (23) (Fig. 2B).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orthographic processing in pigeons ( Columba livia )

Scarf

Boy

Reinert

et al. 2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Learning to read involves the acquisition of letter-sound relationships (i.e., decoding skills) and the ability to visually recognize words (i.e., orthographic knowledge). Although decoding skills are clearly human-unique, given they are seated in language, recent research and theory suggest that orthographic processing may derive from the exaptation or recycling of visual circuits that evolved to recognize everyday objects and shapes in our natural environment. An open question is whether orthographic processing is limited to visual circuits that are similar to our own or a product of plasticity common to many vertebrate visual systems. Here we show that pigeons, organisms that separated from humans more than 300 million y ago, process words orthographically. Specifically, we demonstrate that pigeons trained to discriminate words from nonwords picked up on the orthographic properties that define words and used this knowledge to identify words they had never seen before. In addition, the pigeons were sensitive to the bigram frequencies of words (i.e., the common co-occurrence of certain letter pairs), the edit distance between nonwords and words, and the internal structure of words. Our findings demonstrate that visual systems organizationally distinct from the primate visual system can also be exapted or recycled to process the visual word form.O n the surface, the human brain seems to have evolved for reading (1). Across individuals and cultures (2), reading activates an identical area in the left lateral occipitotemporal sulcus known as the visual word form area (VWFA) (3). This activation occurs no matter the case or font of the script (4), it increases in the transition from being illiterate to literate (5), and it increases with improvements in reading fluency (6). However, the presence of a VWFA is difficult to assimilate with the fact that writing was invented merely ∼5,400 y ago, and only became widespread very recently in human history, making it impossible that an area of the human brain evolved specifically for reading (7). Without the time to evolve, how can we explain the presence of the VWFA? One intriguing possibility is that the VWFA is the product of neuronal recycling, with its neurons learning to code visual stimuli (i.e., words) that greatly differ from the visual objects it initially evolved to code (8, 9).Anatomically, the VWFA lies just downstream of the ventral visual (i.e., what) pathway, a hierarchy of areas critical to visual object and face recognition in human and nonhuman primates. Dehaene et al. (10) argue that this hierarchy of areas can be tuned to the visual word form, with areas lower in the hierarchy simply encoding letter identities, and areas in the upper echelons of the hierarchy, specifically the VWFA, tuned to the co-occurrence of letter pairs (i.e., bigrams) and letter strings. At the present time, there are no neurophysiological studies that have investigated whether neurons in the nonhuman primate temporal lobe can learn to code anything beyond individual alphabetic ...

show abstract

“…The study of Tiffin-Richards and Schroeder (2015) along with other recent studies (e.g., Blythe et al, 2010;Häikiö et al, 2010;Rayner et al, 2011) demonstrates that the display-change paradigms (the moving-window and the boundary paradigm) can be successfully used with children and older adults. It can be expected that the use of these methods will greatly enhance our knowledge about the amount and nature of children's parafoveal processing.…”

Section: Development Of Eye Movements In Reading: Contributions Of Thmentioning

confidence: 96%

Developmental eye-tracking research in reading: Introduction to the special issue

Schroeder

Hyönä

Liversedge

2015

Journal of Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children's and adults' parafoveal processes in German: Phonological and orthographic effects

Cited by 67 publications

References 56 publications

Parafoveal preprocessing of word initial trigrams during reading in adults and children.

Parafoveal preprocessing of word initial trigrams during reading in adults and children.

Orthographic processing in pigeons ( Columba livia )

Developmental eye-tracking research in reading: Introduction to the special issue

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About