Some temporal characteristics of processing during reading.

McConkie, George W.; Underwood, N. R.; Zola, David; Wolverton, Gary S.

doi:10.1037/0096-1523.11.2.168

Cited by 55 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We also excluded all instances in which a first fixation fell on the blank space preceding a target, when a first fixation was preceded by an extremely large saccade extending across 20 character spaces or more, and when a first fixation was preceded by a left-directed regressive saccade (approximately 5% of the data). Fixation durations of less than 100 msec were not included because they do not appear to be sensitive to effects of parafoveal masking (lnhoff, Topolski, & Wang, 1992;McConkie, Underwood, Zola, & Wolverton, 1985). Gaze durations, firstfixation durations, and saccade size, each comprising 4,850 measures, were analyzed with a 2 (parafoveal masking) X 2 (task type) x 4 (refresh rate) within-subjects analysis of variance (ANOYA).…”

Section: Experimentl Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eye-movement-contingent display changes are not compromised by flicker and phosphor persistence

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The eye-movement-contingent display change technique has been used in a large number of studies to control the visibility of text when eye movements are monitored. Recently, the validity of the method has been questioned. O'Regan (1990) argued that technical imperfections in the implementation of the display change, rather than manipulation of visible text, account for some of the reported effects. 'This view was tested in the present study by manipulating characteristics of the display change and the linguistic task. Consistent with prior results, reading was hampered when eye-movement-contingent display changes were used to mask segments of text prior to their fixation. However, these costs were unrelated to the quality of the implemented display change and appear to have derived solely from the masking of useful text.

show abstract

Section: Experimentl Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eye-movement-contingent display changes are not compromised by flicker and phosphor persistence

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gaze-contingent moving-window and boundary experiments aimed to determine the relative and absolute times at which stimulus information becomes available (McConkie, Underwood, Zola, & Wolverton, 1985). Sereno, Rayner, and Posner (1998) …”

Section: Lexical Access and Oculomotor Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eye movements and brain electric potentials during reading

Kliegl

Dambacher

Dimigen

et al. 2011

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of theories and computational models of reading requires an understanding of processing constraints, in particular of timelines related to word recognition and oculomotor control. Timelines of word recognition are usually determined with event-related potentials (ERPs) recorded under conditions of serial visual presentation (SVP) of words; timelines of oculomotor control are derived from parameters of eye movements (EMs) during natural reading.We describe two strategies to integrate these approaches. One is to collect ERPs and EMs in separate SVP and natural reading experiments for the same experimental material (but different subjects).The other strategy is to co-register EMs and ERPs during natural reading from the same subjects.Both strategies yield data that allow us to determine how lexical properties influence ERPs (e.g., the N400 component) and EMs (e.g., fixation durations) across neighboring words. We review our recent research on the effects of frequency and predictability of words on both EM and ERP measures with reference to current models of eye-movement control during reading. Results are in support of the proposition that lexical access is distributed across several fixations and across brain-electric potentials measured on neighboring words.Eye movements and ERP during reading 3

show abstract

“…Moreover, the effeet of parafoveal preprocessing is larger for words that are predictable from their preeeding context (McClelland & O'Regan, 1981;Paap & Newsome, 1981). Within-word tactics as weil as gaze durations and individual fixation durations on words are also influenced by parafoveal preprocessing (Balota, Pollatsek, & Rayner, 1985;Inhoff, 1989;Lima&Inhoff, 1985;McConkie, Underwood, Zola, & Wolverton, 1985) and by linguistic context (Ehrlich & Rayner, 1981;Zola, 1984), the effeet of parafoveal preprocessing being stronger for highly predictable words than it is for less predictable words (Balota et al, 1985).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of parafoveal preprocessing and linguistic context on the optimal landing position effect

Vitu

1991

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several experiments have shown the existence of an optimallanding position effect during isolated word recognition as weH as during text reading; both the probability of refixating the test word and the gaze duration are smaller if the eye first fixates near the center of the word than ifthe eye first fixates other positions in the word. However, recent data indicate that the optimal landing position effect is weakened under normal reading conditions, when words are included in texts. The purpose of the present experiment was to test whether parafoveal preprocessing or linguistic context specific to the text reading situation could be responsible for this weakening. With a paradigm that approximates normal reading, albeit in a somewhat slower manner, it was shown that although the possibility of preprocessing words in parafoveal vision and of predicting them from preceding context globaHy affected refixation probability and gaze duration on the word, this did not strongly affect the optimallanding position effect. Since the global effects of these factors were comparable to those found by other authors in normal reading, it was concludedthat the weakening ofthe optimallanding position effect during text reading results from the influence of other factors peculiar to this situation. Hypotheses are proposed as explanations of the effects of the manipulated factors on oculomotor behavior.In a number of recent experiments, the existence of an optimal landing position in words has been shown during isolated word recognition (Holmes & O'Regan, 1987;O'Regan, 1984O'Regan, , 1989O'Regan & Levy-Schoen, 1987; O'Regan, Levy-Schoen, Pynte, & Brugaillere, 1984). In these experiments the eye's initial fixation position in the word was manipulated, and it was observed that if the eye first fixated near the middle of the word, the probability of refixating the word and, consequently, the gaze duration (the total time the eye spent on the word) were smaller than they were when the eye first fixated other positions in the word. Individual fixation durations were also shown to depend on the eye's first fixation position in the word as well as on within-word tactics (whether one, two, or more fixations were made within the word).On the basis ofthese results, O'Regan and Levy-Schoen (1987) and O'Regan (1990) have suggested that withinword tactics during text reading may be determined by a preestablished program based on the eye's initial landing position. That is, if the eye lands in a region that is generally optimal (near the word's rniddle), the eye would directly leave the word, and, on the contrary, if the eye lands at a nonoptimal position, it would refixate the word before leaving it. Individual fixation durations would de- pend on the tactics adopted on the word and also on the eye's first fixation position in the word.Results from recent experiments seem to favor this hypothesis, since they have confirmed the existence of an optimal landing position for words included in texts (McConkie, Kerr, Reddix, Zola, & Jacobs, 1989; ...

show abstract

Some temporal characteristics of processing during reading.

Cited by 55 publications

References 41 publications

Eye-movement-contingent display changes are not compromised by flicker and phosphor persistence

Eye-movement-contingent display changes are not compromised by flicker and phosphor persistence

Eye movements and brain electric potentials during reading

The influence of parafoveal preprocessing and linguistic context on the optimal landing position effect

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About