@article{YanZhouShuetal.2012,
  author    = {Yan, Ming and Zhou, Wei and Shu, Hua and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {Lexical and sublexical semantic preview benefits in chinese reading},
  series = {Journal of experimental psychology : Learning, memory, and cognition},
  volume    = {38},
  journal   = {Journal of experimental psychology : Learning, memory, and cognition},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {American Psychological Association},
  address   = {Washington},
  issn      = {0278-7393},
  doi       = {10.1037/a0026935},
  pages     = {1069 -- 1075},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Semantic processing from parafoveal words is an elusive phenomenon in alphabetic languages, but it has been demonstrated only for a restricted set of noncompound Chinese characters. Using the gaze-contingent boundary paradigm, this experiment examined whether parafoveal lexical and sublexical semantic information was extracted from compound preview characters. Results generalized parafoveal semantic processing to this representative set of Chinese characters and extended the parafoveal processing to radical (sublexical) level semantic information extraction. Implications for notions of parafoveal information extraction during Chinese reading are discussed.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{RisseKliegl2012,
  author    = {Risse, Sarah and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {Evidence for delayed Parafoveal-on-Foveal effects from word n+2 in reading},
  series = {Journal of experimental psychology : Human perception and performance},
  volume    = {38},
  journal   = {Journal of experimental psychology : Human perception and performance},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {American Psychological Association},
  address   = {Washington},
  issn      = {0096-1523},
  doi       = {10.1037/a0027735},
  pages     = {1026 -- 1042},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {During reading information is acquired from word(s) beyond the word that is currently looked at. It is still an open question whether such parafoveal information can influence the current viewing of a word, and if so, whether such parafoveal-on-foveal effects are attributable to distributed processing or to mislocated fixations which occur when the eyes are directed at a parafoveal word but land on another word instead. In two display-change experiments, we orthogonally manipulated the preview and target difficulty of word n+2 to investigate the role of mislocated fixations on the previous word n+1. When the eyes left word n, an easy or difficult word n+2 preview was replaced by an easy or difficult n+2 target word. In Experiment 1, n+2 processing difficulty was manipulated by means of word frequency (i.e., easy high-frequency vs. difficult low-frequency word n+2). In Experiment 2, we varied the visual familiarity of word n+2 (i.e., easy lower-case vs. difficult alternating-case writing). Fixations on the short word n+1, which were likely to be mislocated, were nevertheless not influenced by the difficulty of the adjacent word n+2, the hypothesized target of the mislocated fixation. Instead word n+1 was influenced by the preview difficulty of word n+2, representing a delayed parafoveal-on-foveal effect. The results challenge the mislocated-fixation hypothesis as an explanation of parafoveal-on-foveal effects and provide new insight into the complex spatial and temporal effect structure of processing inside the perceptual span during reading.},
  language  = {en}
}