Eye Movement Control During Reading: Foveal Load and Parafoveal Processing

Schroyens, W.; Vitu, F.; Brysbaert, M.; D'Ydewalle, G.

doi:10.1080/027249899390909

Cited by 62 publications

(106 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Looking at Table 3, we see an effect of some 11 ms between expected and unexpected words of the same length, together with a 6 ms difference between unexpected two-letter and four-letter words. This is in line with other evidence (e.g., McConkie & Dyre, 2000;Schroyens et al, 1999) that fixation durations are not always fully determined by the ongoing processing of the fixated word. Apparently, the eye guidance system is sometimes programming one saccade ahead, meaning that processing difficulties have to be dealt with by means of regressions (see the total fixation durations in Table 3 and the regression probabilities in Table 5) or longer fixations on subsequent words (the so-called spillover effect).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

“…A large body of research indicates that in reading information is extracted from the word next to the currently fixated word. This parafoveal preview benefit is easily shown by comparing conditions in which the parafoveal word is visible with conditions in which it is masked until the reader's eyes land on it (e.g., Blanchard, Pollatsek, & Rayner, 1989;Morris, Rayner, & Pollatsek, 1990;Rayner, 1975;Rayner, Well, Pollatsek, & Bertera, 1982;Schroyens, Vitu, Brysbaert, & d'Ydewalle, 1999). A major issue, however, is the extent to which the parafoveal information determines the length of the subsequent forward saccade out of the fixated word.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Word skipping in reading: On the interplay of linguistic and visual factors

Drieghe

Brysbaert

Desmet

et al. 2004

European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An eye movement experiment is reported in which target words of two and four letters were presented in sentences that strongly raised the expectation of a particular word. There were three possible conditions: The expected word was present in the sentence, an unexpected word of the same length was present, or an unexpected word of a different length was present (all continuations were acceptable, but the latter two were difficult to predict). Our first purpose was to test one of the core assumptions of the Extended Optimal Viewing Position model of eye guidance in reading (Brysbaert & Vitu, 1998). This model states that word skipping is primarily a function of the length of the upcoming word. It leads to the prediction that an unpredicted two-letter word will be skipped more often than a predicted four-letter word, which is indeed what we observed. Our second aim was to determine if we could obtain an interaction between context predictability and parafoveal word length, by looking at what happens when the length of the parafoveal word does not agree with the length of the expected word. No such interaction was observed although the effects of both word length and predictability were substantial. These findings are interpreted as evidence for the hypothesis that visual and language-related factors independently affect word skipping.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Word skipping in reading: On the interplay of linguistic and visual factors

Drieghe

Brysbaert

Desmet

et al. 2004

European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The topic of clothing was selected given that it has been employed in previous studies (e.g. Schroyens et al, 1999), and as a topic for which all readers should have high prior knowledge, such that relevant text should be easily identified (Kaakinen & Hyönä, 2007). In the topic scanning task, a question was presented only after a relevant sentence, whereas in the reading for comprehension task, a question was presented after every sentence.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Word frequency effects during scanning for a topic have not previously been examined. However studies have shown that word frequency modulates eye movement behaviour when reading lists to identify words within the categories of clothing (Schroyens Vitu, Brysbaert, & d'Ydewalle, 1999) or animals (Murray & Forster, 2008). The word frequency effects in these tasks indicate that words within lists are Eye Movements During Reading and Topic Scanning 8 processed to a lexical level when the task is to identify words within a category.…”

Section: Topic Scanningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eye movements during reading and topic scanning: Effects of word frequency.

White¹,

Warrington²,

McGowan³

et al. 2015

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study examines the nature of eye movement control and word recognition during scanning for a specific topic, compared to reading for comprehension. Experimental trials included a manipulation of word frequency: the critical word was frequent (and orthographically familiar) or infrequent (two conditions: orthographically familiar, orthographically unfamiliar). First-pass reading times showed effects of word frequency for both reading and scanning, with no interactions between word characteristics and task. Therefore, in contrast to the task of searching for a single specific word (Rayner & Fischer, 1996), there are immediate and localised influences of lexical processing when scanning for a specific topic, indicating that early word recognition processes are similar during reading and topic scanning. In contrast, there were interactions for later measures, with larger effects of word frequency during reading than scanning, indicating that reading goals can modulate later processes such as the integration of words into sentence context. Additional analyses of the distribution of first-pass single fixation durations indicate that first-pass fixations of all durations were shortened during scanning compared to reading, and reading for comprehension produced a larger subset of longer first-pass fixations compared to scanning. Implications for the nature of word recognition and eye movement control are discussed.

show abstract

“…First, the question has been raised of whether it is possible to carry out all necessary stages of word processing and oculomotor programming in a strictly sequential framework during the relatively short viewing period of individual words (e.g., Brysbaert & Vitu, 1998;Deubel, O'Regan, & Radach, 2000;Findlay & White, 2003;Radach, Deubel, & Heller, 2003;Sereno, O'Donnell, & Sereno, 2003). Second, there are a number of studies showing that linguistic properties of a parafoveally visible word can influence oculomotor behavior, especially viewing time on the fixated word (e.g., Inhoff, Starr, & Schindler, 2000;Kennedy & Pynte, 2005;Schroyens, Vitu, Brysbaert, & d'Ydewalle, 1999;Starr & Inhoff, 2004;Underwood, Binns, & Walker, 2000), which should not be the case if the saccade to the next word was programmed before any linguistic information was obtained from it.Both lines of critique of the strict seriality assumption are not without problems, however. Current estimates of the minimum time necessary for word recognition (Sereno, Rayner, & Posner, 1998) and saccade reprogramming (Deubel et al, 2000) have been obtained in paradigms that do not correspond to a dynamic reading situation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Time Course of Linguistic Information Extraction From Consecutive Words During Eye Fixations in Reading.

Inhoff¹,

Eiter²,

Radach³

2005

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sequential attention shift models of reading predict that an attended (typically fixated) word must be recognized before useful linguistic information can be obtained from the following (parafoveal) word. These models also predict that linguistic information is obtained from a parafoveal word immediately prior to a saccade toward it. To test these assumptions, sentences were constructed with a critical pretarget-target word sequence, and the temporal availability of the (parafoveal) target preview was manipulated while the pretarget word was fixated. Target viewing effects, examined as a function of prior target visibility, revealed that extraction of linguistic target information began 70-140 ms after the onset of pretarget viewing. Critically, acquisition of useful linguistic information from a target was not confined to the ending period of pretarget viewing. These results favor theoretical conceptions in which there is some temporal overlap in the linguistic processing of a fixated and parafoveally visible word during reading. Keywordsreading; attention; parafoveal preview; alternating case; parallel processing Written language consists of a spatially ordered sequence of symbols, many of which are concurrently available to a reader. High-acuity vision is confined to a relatively small retinal area at any point in time that roughly corresponds to the fovea and immediately adjacent parafovea, so that only a limited amount of visual detail can be discerned when the eyes gaze at (fixate) a particular text location. Hence, readers need to move the eyes at or near a word to recognize it. Normal reading thus requires the development of a task-specific skill, that is, the dynamic coordination of eye movement (saccade) programming with successful visual word recognition and text comprehension.Effects of this coordination are evident in the general progression of eye movements with word order and in robust effects of a word's spatial and linguistic properties on its viewing pattern (see Kennedy, 2004, andRayner, 1998, for reviews). The coordination of eye movement programming with linguistic processes does not require, however, that the eyes are always moved from one word to the next. Although interword saccades to consecutive words Copyright 2005 by the American Psychological AssociationCorrespondence concerning this article should be addressed to Albrecht W. Inhoff, Department of Psychology, Binghamton University, State University of New York, Binghamton, NY 13902-6000. E-mail: E-mail: inhoff@binghamton.edu. NIH Public Access NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscriptin the text are the most common type of eye movement during skilled reading, there is a relatively large proportion of other saccades (Hogaboam, 1983) that move the eyes to a different location within the same word (refixations), to a word beyond the next word in the text (skipping), or to a previously read word (interword regressions). The frequency with which these saccades are executed is a function of word and...

show abstract

Eye Movement Control During Reading: Foveal Load and Parafoveal Processing

Cited by 62 publications

References 11 publications

Word skipping in reading: On the interplay of linguistic and visual factors

Word skipping in reading: On the interplay of linguistic and visual factors

Eye movements during reading and topic scanning: Effects of word frequency.

Time Course of Linguistic Information Extraction From Consecutive Words During Eye Fixations in Reading.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About