@article{SchotterLeinengervonderMalsburg2017,
  author    = {Schotter, Elizabeth Roye and Leinenger, Mallorie and von der Malsburg, Titus Raban},
  title     = {When your mind skips what your eyes fixate},
  series = {Psychonomic bulletin \& review : a journal of the Psychonomic Society},
  volume    = {25},
  journal   = {Psychonomic bulletin \& review : a journal of the Psychonomic Society},
  number    = {5},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {1069-9384},
  doi       = {10.3758/s13423-017-1356-y},
  pages     = {1884 -- 1890},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {The phenomenon of forced fixations suggests that readers sometimes fixate a word (due to oculomotor constraints) even though they intended to skip it (due to parafoveal cognitive-linguistic processing). We investigate whether this leads readers to look directly at a word but not pay attention to it. We used a gaze-contingent boundary paradigm to dissociate parafoveal and foveal information (e.g., the word phone changed to scarf once the reader's eyes moved to it) and asked questions about the sentence to determine which one the reader encoded. When the word was skipped or fixated only briefly (i.e., up to 100 ms) readers were more likely to report reading the parafoveal than the fixated word, suggesting that there are cases in which readers look directly at a word but their minds ignore it, leading to the illusion of reading something they did not fixate.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{vonderMalsburgAngele2017,
  author    = {von der Malsburg, Titus Raban and Angele, Bernhard},
  title     = {False positives and other statistical errors in standard analyses of eye movements in reading},
  series = {Journal of memory and language},
  volume    = {94},
  journal   = {Journal of memory and language},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {San Diego},
  issn      = {0749-596X},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.jml.2016.10.003},
  pages     = {119 -- 133},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {In research on eye movements in reading, it is common to analyze a number of canonical dependent measures to study how the effects of a manipulation unfold over time. Although this gives rise to the well-known multiple comparisons problem, i.e. an inflated probability that the null hypothesis is incorrectly rejected (Type I error), it is accepted standard practice not to apply any correction procedures. Instead, there appears to be a widespread belief that corrections are not necessary because the increase in false positives is too small to matter. To our knowledge, no formal argument has ever been presented to justify this assumption. Here, we report a computational investigation of this issue using Monte Carlo simulations. Our results show that, contrary to conventional wisdom, false positives are increased to unacceptable levels when no corrections are applied. Our simulations also show that counter-measures like the Bonferroni correction keep false positives in check while reducing statistical power only moderately. Hence, there is little reason why such corrections should not be made a standard requirement. Further, we discuss three statistical illusions that can arise when statistical power is low, and we show how power can be improved to prevent these illusions. In sum, our work renders a detailed picture of the various types of statistical errors than can occur in studies of reading behavior and we provide concrete guidance about how these errors can be avoided. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{MetznervonderMalsburgVasishthetal.2017,
  author    = {Metzner, Paul and von der Malsburg, Titus Raban and Vasishth, Shravan and Roesler, Frank},
  title     = {The Importance of Reading Naturally: Evidence From Combined Recordings of Eye Movements and Electric Brain Potentials},
  series = {Cognitive science : a multidisciplinary journal of anthropology, artificial intelligence, education, linguistics, neuroscience, philosophy, psychology ; journal of the Cognitive Science Society},
  volume    = {41},
  journal   = {Cognitive science : a multidisciplinary journal of anthropology, artificial intelligence, education, linguistics, neuroscience, philosophy, psychology ; journal of the Cognitive Science Society},
  publisher = {Wiley},
  address   = {Hoboken},
  issn      = {0364-0213},
  doi       = {10.1111/cogs.12384},
  pages     = {1232 -- 1263},
  year      = {2017},
  language  = {en}
}