The role of global top-down factors in local eye-movement control in reading

Radach, Ralph; Huestegge, Lynn; Reilly, Ronan G.

doi:10.1007/s00426-008-0173-3

Cited by 124 publications

(138 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

125

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This converges with a weaker effect of word frequency in passage--embedded sentences as compared to same sentences presented in isolated (Radach et al, 2008). This finding may also be in line with claims that the word frequency effect is better understood as an effect due to the ease with which a context for the word can be activated (i.e.…”

Section: Eye Movement Data Correlate More Strongly With Lexical Decissupporting

confidence: 86%

“…This result is best understood in the context of recent findings of Radach et al (2008) who in an eye--tracking study manipulated the presentation format of the sentences (isolated sentence versus passage) and the reader's task (comprehension versus verification). Among other phenomena, Radach et al observed that gaze durations were shorter in passage--embedded sentences than in same sentences presented in isolation, but that total reading times were longer.…”

Section: Eye Movement Data Correlate More Strongly With Lexical Decismentioning

confidence: 84%

“…The fact that the correlations are even lower in corpus studies compared to studies examining fixation durations on unpredictable words embedded in single sentences, is compatible with this statement. It is reasonable to assume that effects of predictability (though not word frequency, as shown here and in Radach et al, 2008) will play a bigger role in coherent samples of natural text, compared to single sentences designed to be meaningful on their own.…”

Section: Word Frequency Is Measured As Log10(frequency Per Million Womentioning

confidence: 93%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How strongly do word reading times and lexical decision times correlate? Combining data from eye movement corpora and megastudies

Kuperman

Drieghe

Keuleers

et al. 2013

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We assess the amount of shared variance between three measures of visual word recognition latencies: eye movement latencies, lexical decision times and naming times.After partialling out the effects of word frequency and word length, two well--documented predictors of word recognition latencies, we see that 7--44% of the variance is uniquely shared between lexical decision times and naming times, depending on the frequency range of the words used. A similar analysis of eye movement latencies shows that the percentage of variance they uniquely share either with lexical decision times or with naming times is much lower. It is 5 -17% for gaze durations and lexical decision times in studies with target words presented in neutral sentences, but drops to .2% for corpus studies in which eye movements to all words are analysed. Correlations between gaze durations and naming latencies are lower still. These findings suggest that processing times in isolated word processing and continuous text reading are affected by specific task demands and presentation format, and that lexical decision times and naming times are not very informative in predicting eye movement latencies in text reading once the effect of word frequency and word length are taken into account. The difference between controlled experiments and natural reading suggests that reading strategies and stimulus materials may determine the degree to which the immediacy--of--processing assumption and the eye--mind assumption apply. Fixation times are more likely to exclusively reflect the lexical processing of the currently fixated word in controlled studies with unpredictable target words rather than in natural reading of sentences or texts. 3 One of the ways in which theories of visual word processing aim to explain the cognitive processes involved in reading, is by accounting for differences in the time required to recognize different words. Hence, recognition times for large samples of words in different languages are collected to validate (computational) models of word processing. The question arises as to whether different measures of word recognition time are equally valid estimates when testing these theories.At first sight, the most ecologically valid estimate of the time needed to recognize a printed word is the time the eyes remain fixated on that word in silent reading, possibly over multiple fixations. However, these measures, which are typically obtained by registering the reader's eye movements with an eye--tracking system, are not necessarily the best estimates of word processing durations. As Kliegl, Nuthmann, and Engbert (2006) noted, the usefulness of reading times based on eye movements hinges on two assumptions. The first is the immediacy--of--processing assumption, or the idea that words are interpreted as soon as they are encountered (i.e., there are no instances in which word interpretation is temporarily suspended). The second is the eye--mind assumption, or the idea that readers continue to inspect a word for as long as that wo...

show abstract

Section: Eye Movement Data Correlate More Strongly With Lexical Decissupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Eye Movement Data Correlate More Strongly With Lexical Decismentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Word Frequency Is Measured As Log10(frequency Per Million Womentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How strongly do word reading times and lexical decision times correlate? Combining data from eye movement corpora and megastudies

Kuperman

Drieghe

Keuleers

et al. 2013

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…longer gaze durations for sentence reading compared to passage reading, Radach, Huestegge, & Reilly, 2008;Wochna & Juhasz, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Processing of Arabic diacritical marks: Phonological–syntactic disambiguation of homographic verbs and visual crowding effects.

Hermena¹,

Drieghe²,

Hellmuth³

et al. 2015

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diacritics convey vowel sounds in Arabic, allowing accurate word pronunciation.Mostly, modern Arabic is printed non-diacritised. Otherwise, diacritics appear either only on homographic words when not disambiguated by surrounding text or on all words as in religious or educational texts. In an eye tracking experiment we examined sentence processing in the absence of diacritics, and when diacritics were presented in either modes. Heterophonic-homographic were embedded in temporarily ambiguous sentences where in the absence of diacritics, readers cannot be certain whether the verb was active or passive. Passive sentences were disambiguated by an extra word (e.g., ‫بيد‬ /b i j a d/, by the hand of). Our results show that readers benefitted from the disambiguating diacritics when present only on the homographic verb. When disambiguating diacritics were absent, Arabic readers followed their parsing preference for active verb analysis, and garden path effects were observed. When reading fully diacritised sentences, readers incurred only a small cost, likely due to increased visual crowding, but did not extensively process the (mostly superfluous) diacritics, thus resulting in a lack of benefit from the disambiguating diacritics on the passive verb.Keywords: diacritics, reading Arabic, eye movements, garden path, parsing preferenceReading in a number of the world's languages has been studied using the methodology of tracking readers' eye movements (see e.g. Rayner, 1998;2009 the role of vowel phonology in Arabic in the computation of syntactic structure, and the construction of semantic representations). In addition, these unique properties allow us to pose novel questions concerning written language processing in general.Eye tracking is a non-intrusive way of studying the cognitive processes associated with reading since readers' eye movements are tightly linked with these processes (e.g., Liversedge & Findlay, 2000;Rayner, 1998;2009). The research reported here used eye-tracking methodology to explore readers'processing of Arabic vowel phonology, and whether, and how, this phonological processing interacts with syntactic processing.Arabic is an alphabetic language, which, like Hebrew, is written and read from right to left. Also like Hebrew, letters mainly denote consonant sounds, whereas short vowels are denoted by diacritical marks (diacritics hereafter, see Abu-Rabia, 2002;Haywood & Nahmad, 1965; Schulz, 2004), which are added to the written letters.This vowel information has the potential to disambiguate the pronunciation of words 1984; Bentin & Frost, 1987; Koriat, 1984); and offline measures in text reading tasks (e.g. reading speed and accuracy, or comprehension measures, e.g. Abu-Rabia, 1997a;1997b;. Some studies have suggested that the presence of diacritics contributes to improved reading accuracy and comprehension. Abu-Rabia (1997a), for instance, presented readers with single words, sentences and paragraphs, which were diacritised, or non-diacritised. The readers were 10th grade (about 16 years ...

show abstract

“…As an example, Radach, Huestegge, and Reilly (2008) have shown that varying the depth of processing via application of different types of comprehension questions has profound effects on the dynamics of reading. Going a step further, Wotschack and Kliegl (2011) demonstrated that intra-individual variation of reading strategy can modulate the type of spatially distributed word processing that has been the focus of so many of the contributions to the present special issue.…”

Section: Issues For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

The dynamics of reading in non-Roman writing systems: a Reading and Writing Special Issue

Reilly

Radach

2012

Read Writ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides a short overview of current issues in research on continuous reading in non-Roman orthographies. At the same time it also serves as an introduction to the present Reading and Writing Special Issue on this topic. The main questions examined in the contributions to this volume are closely related to issues that have been central to research debates on reading in English, German and French. However, we argue that these innovative approaches to the dynamics of reading in Chinese, Japanese and Korean go far beyond a simple comparative research strategy. Instead, by illuminating phenomena like word segmentation, parafoveal processing and semantic analysis from their unique perspectives, they provide valuable insights into the more general question of to what extent information processing in reading is universal as opposed to language specific. Moreover, we expect that these initial studies will trigger more basic research on non-alphabetic reading, providing a foundation for useful application.

show abstract

The role of global top-down factors in local eye-movement control in reading

Cited by 124 publications

References 54 publications

How strongly do word reading times and lexical decision times correlate? Combining data from eye movement corpora and megastudies

How strongly do word reading times and lexical decision times correlate? Combining data from eye movement corpora and megastudies

Processing of Arabic diacritical marks: Phonological–syntactic disambiguation of homographic verbs and visual crowding effects.

The dynamics of reading in non-Roman writing systems: a Reading and Writing Special Issue

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About