Perceptual specificity effects in rereading: Evidence from eye movements

Sheridan, Heather; Reingold, Eyal M.

doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.05.005

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As reviewed by Reingold and Sheridan (2011), experts in many domains of expertise have been shown to efficiently process domain-related material in terms of larger configurations, as shown by findings that radiologists can rapidly fixate abnormalities in less than a second (Kundel et al, 2008). Moreover, this key role of perceptual processing in expertise coincides with other evidence for perceptual specificity effects in memory and learning (for reviews, see Levy, 1993; Roediger and McDermott, 1993; Reingold, 2002), such as recent findings that eye fixation times are shorter for words that were read twice in the same typography (i.e., font) rather than in two different typographies (Sheridan and Reingold, 2012a,b), and findings that chess experts perform better when viewing familiar chess symbols compared to a condition in which letters (i.e., B = Bishop, P = Pawn, etc.) were shown instead of the symbols (Reingold et al, 2001a).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Expert vs. novice differences in the detection of relevant information during a chess game: evidence from eye movements

Sheridan

Reingold

2014

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study explored the ability of expert and novice chess players to rapidly distinguish between regions of a chessboard that were relevant to the best move on the board, and regions of the board that were irrelevant. Accordingly, we monitored the eye movements of expert and novice chess players, while they selected white's best move for a variety of chess problems. To manipulate relevancy, we constructed two different versions of each chess problem in the experiment, and we counterbalanced these versions across participants. These two versions of each problem were identical except that a single piece was changed from a bishop to a knight. This subtle change reversed the relevancy map of the board, such that regions that were relevant in one version of the board were now irrelevant (and vice versa). Using this paradigm, we demonstrated that both the experts and novices spent more time fixating the relevant relative to the irrelevant regions of the board. However, the experts were faster at detecting relevant information than the novices, as shown by the finding that experts (but not novices) were able to distinguish between relevant and irrelevant information during the early part of the trial. These findings further demonstrate the domain-related perceptual processing advantage of chess experts, using an experimental paradigm that allowed us to manipulate relevancy under tightly controlled conditions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Expert vs. novice differences in the detection of relevant information during a chess game: evidence from eye movements

Sheridan

Reingold

2014

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…G. Paterson & Tinker, 1947;Rayner, Reichle, Stroud, Williams, & Pollatsek, 2006;Sheridan & Reingold, 2012a, 2012bSlattery & Rayner, 2010;Tinker & Paterson, 1955), visual content (e.g., K. B. Paterson, McGowan, & Jordan, 2012), and the removal of interword spaces (e.g., Rayner, Fischer, & Pollatsek, 1998;Sheridan, Rayner, & Reingold, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A further examination of the lexical-processing stages hypothesized by the E-Z Reader model

Sheridan

Reingold

2013

Atten Percept Psychophys

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Participants' eye movements were monitored while they read sentences in which high-and lowfrequency target words were presented normally (i.e., the normal condition) or with either reduced stimulus quality (i.e., the faint condition) or alternating lower-and uppercase letters (i.e., the case-alternated condition). Both the stimulus quality and case alternation manipulations interacted with word frequency for the gaze duration measure, such that the magnitude of word frequency effects was increased relative to the normal condition. However, stimulus quality (but not case alternation) interacted with word frequency for the early fixation time measures (i.e., first fixation, single fixation), whereas case alternation (but not stimulus quality) interacted with word frequency for the later fixation time measures (i.e., total time, go-past time). We interpret this pattern of results as evidence that stimulus quality influences an earlier stage of lexical processing than does case alternation, and we discuss the implications of our results for models of eye movement control during reading.Keywords Reading . Eye movements . Case alternation . Stimulus quality . Lexical processing . Word frequency Over the past three decades, the study of eye movement control during reading has been the focus of extensive empirical and theoretical efforts (for reviews, see Rayner, 1998Rayner, , 2009 Feng, 2006). These models incorporate various assumptions and generate unique predictions that have inspired empirical tests.Of particular relevance to the present study, Reingold and Rayner (2006) tested the central assumption of the influential E-Z Reader model (Reichle, 2011;Reichle et al., 1998;Reichle, Pollatsek, & Rayner, 2012) that word identification reflects two separate stages of lexical processing. Specifically, the E-Z Reader model assumes that the initiation of the programming of a saccade to the next word (word n + 1 ) occurs prior to the completion of lexical access to the fixated word (word n ). Saccadic programming is postulated to be driven by the output of an early lexicalprocessing stage (L 1 ), which indicates that lexical access to word n is imminent. Lexical processing of word n is then completed during a subsequent stage of lexical processing (L 2 ), and the conclusion of this stage causes covert attention to shift to word n + 1 . During the interval of time between this attention shift and the launch of the word n -to-word n + 1 saccade, parafoveal processing of word n + 1 is initiated. The duration of this interval, referred to as the parafoveal preview, is expected to determine the magnitude of any processing benefit when word n + 1 is later fixated (with longer preview resulting in shorter fixations on word n + 1 ). Importantly, as was argued by Reingold (2003), the E-Z Reader model predicts that experimental manipulations that disrupt L 1 but not L 2 should influence the processing difficulty of word n without affecting the processing of word n + 1 , whereas manipulations that impact L 2 should impact wor...

show abstract

“…In addition, language-comprehension processes change between the first reading of a text and its subsequent rereading. These studies have generally shown large processing advantages during the second reading (e.g., Carr, Brown, & Charalambous, 1989; Hyona & Niemi, 1990; Levy & Burns, 1990; Raney & Rayner, 1995; Sheridan & Reingold, 2012). In particular, Raney and Rayner examined the influence of word frequency on text rereading, demonstrating that frequency and repetition had additive effects on eye-movement measures, but that there was no interaction between these two factors.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Word recognition during reading: The interaction between lexical repetition and frequency

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Memory studies utilizing long-term repetition priming have generally demonstrated that priming is greater for low-frequency words than for high-frequency words and that this effect persists if words intervene between the prime and the target. In contrast, word-recognition studies utilizing masked short-term repetition priming typically show that the magnitude of repetition priming does not differ as a function of word frequency and does not persist across intervening words. We conducted an eye-tracking while reading experiment to determine which of these patterns more closely resembles the relationship between frequency and repetition during the natural reading of a text. Frequency was manipulated using proper names that were high-frequency (e.g., Stephen) or low-frequency (e.g., Dominic). The critical name was later repeated in the sentence, or a new name was introduced. First-pass reading times and skipping rates on the critical name revealed robust repetition-by-frequency interactions such that the magnitude of the repetition-priming effect was greater for low-frequency names than for high-frequency names. In contrast, measures of later processing showed effects of repetition that did not depend on lexical frequency. These results are interpreted within a framework that conceptualizes eye-movement control as being influenced in different ways by lexical- and discourse-level factors.

show abstract

Perceptual specificity effects in rereading: Evidence from eye movements

Cited by 6 publications

References 71 publications

Expert vs. novice differences in the detection of relevant information during a chess game: evidence from eye movements

Expert vs. novice differences in the detection of relevant information during a chess game: evidence from eye movements

A further examination of the lexical-processing stages hypothesized by the E-Z Reader model

Word recognition during reading: The interaction between lexical repetition and frequency

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About