Comprehension processes and eye movement patterns in the reading of surprise‐ending stories

Blanchard, Harry E.; Iran‐Nejad, Asghar

doi:10.1080/01638538709544663

Cited by 38 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another case in which regressions are especially likely is when readers encounter an unexpected word (Ehrlich & Rayner, 1983). Furthermore, a number of studies have demonstrated that regressions are used to aid in the integration of text segments and that difficulties in higher level processes, such as building a discourse model, result in more regressions (Blanchard & Iran-Nejad, 1987;Hyono, 1993;Shebilske & Fisher, 1983;Vauras, Hyono, & Niemi, 1992). For example, Vauras et al found that structurally incoherent passages led to more regressions than did coherent passages.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of titles on the processing of text and lexically ambiguous words: Evidence from eye movements

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of titles on the processing of text and lexically ambiguous words: Evidence from eye movements

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…), or when they encounter information that disambiguates the preceding text (Blanchard & Iran-Nejad, 1987;Frazier & Rayner, 1982). All of these effects suggest that readers make regressions to reread or check previously read words.…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

The function of regressions in reading: Backward eye movements allow rereading

Booth

Weger

2012

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard text reading involves frequent eye movements that go against normal reading order. The function of these "regressions" is still largely unknown. The most obvious explanation is that regressions allow for the rereading of previously fixated words. Alternatively, physically returning the eyes to a word's location could cue the reader's memory for that word, effectively aiding the comprehension process via location priming (the "deictic pointer hypothesis"). In Experiment 1, regression frequency was reduced when readers knew that information was no longer available for rereading. In Experiment 2, readers listened to auditorily presented text while moving their eyes across visual placeholders on the screen. Here, rereading was impossible, but deictic pointers remained available, yet the readers did not make targeted regressions in this experiment. In Experiment 3, target words in normal sentences were changed after reading. Where the eyes later regressed to these words, participants generally remained unaware of the change, and their answers to comprehension questions indicated that the new meaning of the changed word was what determined their sentence representations. These results suggest that readers use regressions to reread words and not to cue their memory for previously read words.

show abstract

“…For example, in Blanc, Kendeou, van den Broek, and Brouillet (2008), readers verbalized inferences of causal relationships between two discrepant sentences. Similarly, others have demonstrated that readers may distort or "hedge" one or more aspects of the content statements to resolve the discrepancy (Black, Turner, & Bower, 1979;Chinn & Brewer, 1993Hakala & O'Brien, 1995;Mosenthal, 1979;Otero & Kintsch, 1992).Recent efforts have capitalized on the affordances of eye movement methodologies to better understand the cognitive processes surrounding readers' resolution attempts during unrestricted reading (Blanchard & Iran-Nejad, 1987;Cook & Myers, 2004;Daneman, Lennertz, & Hannon, 2007;Rayner, Chace, Slattery, & Ashby, 2006;Rinck, Gámez, Díaz, & de Vega, 2003). These studies demonstrated that, when readers come across a statement containing information that is discrepant with previously read information, they return to the discrepant information to more "deeply" reprocess its content.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Readers’ use of source information in text comprehension

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In two experiments, we examined the role of discrepancy on readers' text processing of and memory for the sources of brief news reports. Each story included two assertions that were attributed to different sources. We manipulated whether the second assertion was either discrepant or consistent with the first assertion. On the basis of the discrepancy-induced source comprehension (D-ISC) assumption, we predicted that discrepant stories would promote deeper processing and better memory for the sources conveying the messages, as compared to consistent stories. As predicted, readers mentioned more sources in summaries of discrepant stories, recalled more sources, made more fixations, and displayed longer gaze times in source areas when reading discrepant than when reading consistent stories. In Experiment 2, we found enhanced memory for source-content links for discrepant stories even when intersentential connectors were absent, and regardless of the reading goals. Discussion was focused on discrepancies as one mechanism by which readers are prompted to encode source-content links more deeply, as a method of integrating disparate pieces of information into a coherent mental representation of a text.Keywords Discrepancies . Eye movements . Memory . Sources . Text comprehensionThere is an old saying that "there are two sides to every story." This saying describes the observation that, in everyday contexts, we are frequently presented with and must comprehend uncertain or tentative events, which have resulted in multiple interpretations. In newspaper reports, for example, a single event is often described (e.g., a fire in a building) that may be attributed to various reasons (sabotage vs. electrical malfunction), either within the same report or across several different ones. These kinds of discrepancies are notably different from simple errors in reporting; in fact, they are part and parcel of the state of affairs of the situation. In the present example, the cause of the fire may have been uncertain at the time that the newspapers were printed, investigation may be ongoing, and so on.The present experiments were designed to give some clarity regarding the cognitive mechanisms that operate during the comprehension of discrepancies like these when they appear in texts, particularly when different sources are associated with the conflicting pieces of information (e.g., "The detective claims that the fire in the building was due to sabotage. However, a journalist asserts that the fire was caused by an electrical malfunction."). In the present work, we argue that comprehending discrepancies of this kind requires that readers attend to-and at times rememberwho said what. More colloquially, in the event that readers have accessed a discrepancy during reading, are they more Mem Cogn (2012) 40:450-465 DOI 10.3758/s13421-011-0160-6 likely to pay attention to and remember the "two sides to the story," and if so, why? Do readers regularly monitor their understandings of texts and notice when texts present conflicting...

show abstract

Comprehension processes and eye movement patterns in the reading of surprise‐ending stories

Cited by 38 publications

References 11 publications

Effects of titles on the processing of text and lexically ambiguous words: Evidence from eye movements

Effects of titles on the processing of text and lexically ambiguous words: Evidence from eye movements

The function of regressions in reading: Backward eye movements allow rereading

Readers’ use of source information in text comprehension

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About