@article{AartsAndersonAndersonetal.2015, author = {Aarts, Alexander A. and Anderson, Joanna E. and Anderson, Christopher J. and Attridge, Peter R. and Attwood, Angela and Axt, Jordan and Babel, Molly and Bahnik, Stepan and Baranski, Erica and Barnett-Cowan, Michael and Bartmess, Elizabeth and Beer, Jennifer and Bell, Raoul and Bentley, Heather and Beyan, Leah and Binion, Grace and Borsboom, Denny and Bosch, Annick and Bosco, Frank A. and Bowman, Sara D. and Brandt, Mark J. and Braswell, Erin and Brohmer, Hilmar and Brown, Benjamin T. and Brown, Kristina and Bruening, Jovita and Calhoun-Sauls, Ann and Callahan, Shannon P. and Chagnon, Elizabeth and Chandler, Jesse and Chartier, Christopher R. and Cheung, Felix and Christopherson, Cody D. and Cillessen, Linda and Clay, Russ and Cleary, Hayley and Cloud, Mark D. and Cohn, Michael and Cohoon, Johanna and Columbus, Simon and Cordes, Andreas and Costantini, Giulio and Alvarez, Leslie D. Cramblet and Cremata, Ed and Crusius, Jan and DeCoster, Jamie and DeGaetano, Michelle A. and Della Penna, Nicolas and den Bezemer, Bobby and Deserno, Marie K. and Devitt, Olivia and Dewitte, Laura and Dobolyi, David G. and Dodson, Geneva T. and Donnellan, M. Brent and Donohue, Ryan and Dore, Rebecca A. and Dorrough, Angela and Dreber, Anna and Dugas, Michelle and Dunn, Elizabeth W. and Easey, Kayleigh and Eboigbe, Sylvia and Eggleston, Casey and Embley, Jo and Epskamp, Sacha and Errington, Timothy M. and Estel, Vivien and Farach, Frank J. and Feather, Jenelle and Fedor, Anna and Fernandez-Castilla, Belen and Fiedler, Susann and Field, James G. and Fitneva, Stanka A. and Flagan, Taru and Forest, Amanda L. and Forsell, Eskil and Foster, Joshua D. and Frank, Michael C. and Frazier, Rebecca S. and Fuchs, Heather and Gable, Philip and Galak, Jeff and Galliani, Elisa Maria and Gampa, Anup and Garcia, Sara and Gazarian, Douglas and Gilbert, Elizabeth and Giner-Sorolla, Roger and Gl{\"o}ckner, Andreas and G{\"o}llner, Lars and Goh, Jin X. and Goldberg, Rebecca and Goodbourn, Patrick T. and Gordon-McKeon, Shauna and Gorges, Bryan and Gorges, Jessie and Goss, Justin and Graham, Jesse and Grange, James A. and Gray, Jeremy and Hartgerink, Chris and Hartshorne, Joshua and Hasselman, Fred and Hayes, Timothy and Heikensten, Emma and Henninger, Felix and Hodsoll, John and Holubar, Taylor and Hoogendoorn, Gea and Humphries, Denise J. and Hung, Cathy O. -Y. and Immelman, Nathali and Irsik, Vanessa C. and Jahn, Georg and Jaekel, Frank and Jekel, Marc and Johannesson, Magnus and Johnson, Larissa G. and Johnson, David J. and Johnson, Kate M. and Johnston, William J. and Jonas, Kai and Joy-Gaba, Jennifer A. and Kappes, Heather Barry and Kelso, Kim and Kidwell, Mallory C. and Kim, Seung Kyung and Kirkhart, Matthew and Kleinberg, Bennett and Knezevic, Goran and Kolorz, Franziska Maria and Kossakowski, Jolanda J. and Krause, Robert Wilhelm and Krijnen, Job and Kuhlmann, Tim and Kunkels, Yoram K. and Kyc, Megan M. and Lai, Calvin K. and Laique, Aamir and Lakens, Daniel and Lane, Kristin A. and Lassetter, Bethany and Lazarevic, Ljiljana B. and LeBel, Etienne P. and Lee, Key Jung and Lee, Minha and Lemm, Kristi and Levitan, Carmel A. and Lewis, Melissa and Lin, Lin and Lin, Stephanie and Lippold, Matthias and Loureiro, Darren and Luteijn, Ilse and Mackinnon, Sean and Mainard, Heather N. and Marigold, Denise C. and Martin, Daniel P. and Martinez, Tylar and Masicampo, E. J. and Matacotta, Josh and Mathur, Maya and May, Michael and Mechin, Nicole and Mehta, Pranjal and Meixner, Johannes and Melinger, Alissa and Miller, Jeremy K. and Miller, Mallorie and Moore, Katherine and M{\"o}schl, Marcus and Motyl, Matt and M{\"u}ller, Stephanie M. and Munafo, Marcus and Neijenhuijs, Koen I. and Nervi, Taylor and Nicolas, Gandalf and Nilsonne, Gustav and Nosek, Brian A. and Nuijten, Michele B. and Olsson, Catherine and Osborne, Colleen and Ostkamp, Lutz and Pavel, Misha and Penton-Voak, Ian S. and Perna, Olivia and Pernet, Cyril and Perugini, Marco and Pipitone, R. Nathan and Pitts, Michael and Plessow, Franziska and Prenoveau, Jason M. and Rahal, Rima-Maria and Ratliff, Kate A. and Reinhard, David and Renkewitz, Frank and Ricker, Ashley A. and Rigney, Anastasia and Rivers, Andrew M. and Roebke, Mark and Rutchick, Abraham M. and Ryan, Robert S. and Sahin, Onur and Saide, Anondah and Sandstrom, Gillian M. and Santos, David and Saxe, Rebecca and Schlegelmilch, Rene and Schmidt, Kathleen and Scholz, Sabine and Seibel, Larissa and Selterman, Dylan Faulkner and Shaki, Samuel and Simpson, William B. and Sinclair, H. Colleen and Skorinko, Jeanine L. M. and Slowik, Agnieszka and Snyder, Joel S. and Soderberg, Courtney and Sonnleitner, Carina and Spencer, Nick and Spies, Jeffrey R. and Steegen, Sara and Stieger, Stefan and Strohminger, Nina and Sullivan, Gavin B. and Talhelm, Thomas and Tapia, Megan and te Dorsthorst, Anniek and Thomae, Manuela and Thomas, Sarah L. and Tio, Pia and Traets, Frits and Tsang, Steve and Tuerlinckx, Francis and Turchan, Paul and Valasek, Milan and Van Aert, Robbie and van Assen, Marcel and van Bork, Riet and van de Ven, Mathijs and van den Bergh, Don and van der Hulst, Marije and van Dooren, Roel and van Doorn, Johnny and van Renswoude, Daan R. and van Rijn, Hedderik and Vanpaemel, Wolf and Echeverria, Alejandro Vasquez and Vazquez, Melissa and Velez, Natalia and Vermue, Marieke and Verschoor, Mark and Vianello, Michelangelo and Voracek, Martin and Vuu, Gina and Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan and Weerdmeester, Joanneke and Welsh, Ashlee and Westgate, Erin C. and Wissink, Joeri and Wood, Michael and Woods, Andy and Wright, Emily and Wu, Sining and Zeelenberg, Marcel and Zuni, Kellylynn}, title = {Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science}, series = {Science}, volume = {349}, journal = {Science}, number = {6251}, publisher = {American Assoc. for the Advancement of Science}, address = {Washington}, organization = {Open Sci Collaboration}, issn = {1095-9203}, doi = {10.1126/science.aac4716}, pages = {8}, year = {2015}, abstract = {Reproducibility is a defining feature of science, but the extent to which it characterizes current research is unknown. We conducted replications of 100 experimental and correlational studies published in three psychology journals using high-powered designs and original materials when available. Replication effects were half the magnitude of original effects, representing a substantial decline. Ninety-seven percent of original studies had statistically significant results. Thirty-six percent of replications had statistically significant results; 47\% of original effect sizes were in the 95\% confidence interval of the replication effect size; 39\% of effects were subjectively rated to have replicated the original result; and if no bias in original results is assumed, combining original and replication results left 68\% with statistically significant effects. Correlational tests suggest that replication success was better predicted by the strength of original evidence than by characteristics of the original and replication teams.}, language = {en} } @misc{AndersonBahnikBarnettCowanetal.2016, author = {Anderson, Christopher J. and Bahnik, Stepan and Barnett-Cowan, Michael and Bosco, Frank A. and Chandler, Jesse and Chartier, Christopher R. and Cheung, Felix and Christopherson, Cody D. and Cordes, Andreas and Cremata, Edward J. and Della Penna, Nicolas and Estel, Vivien and Fedor, Anna and Fitneva, Stanka A. and Frank, Michael C. and Grange, James A. and Hartshorne, Joshua K. and Hasselman, Fred and Henninger, Felix and van der Hulst, Marije and Jonas, Kai J. and Lai, Calvin K. and Levitan, Carmel A. and Miller, Jeremy K. and Moore, Katherine S. and Meixner, Johannes M. and Munafo, Marcus R. and Neijenhuijs, Koen I. and Nilsonne, Gustav and Nosek, Brian A. and Plessow, Franziska and Prenoveau, Jason M. and Ricker, Ashley A. and Schmidt, Kathleen and Spies, Jeffrey R. and Stieger, Stefan and Strohminger, Nina and Sullivan, Gavin B. and van Aert, Robbie C. M. and van Assen, Marcel A. L. M. and Vanpaemel, Wolf and Vianello, Michelangelo and Voracek, Martin and Zuni, Kellylynn}, title = {Response to Comment on "Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science"}, series = {Science}, volume = {351}, journal = {Science}, publisher = {American Assoc. for the Advancement of Science}, address = {Washington}, issn = {0036-8075}, doi = {10.1126/science.aad9163}, pages = {1162 -- 1165}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Gilbert et al. conclude that evidence from the Open Science Collaboration's Reproducibility Project: Psychology indicates high reproducibility, given the study methodology. Their very optimistic assessment is limited by statistical misconceptions and by causal inferences from selectively interpreted, correlational data. Using the Reproducibility Project: Psychology data, both optimistic and pessimistic conclusions about reproducibility are possible, and neither are yet warranted.}, language = {en} } @article{MeixnerNixonLaubrock2022, author = {Meixner, Johannes M. and Nixon, Jessie S. and Laubrock, Jochen}, title = {The perceptual span is dynamically adjusted in response to foveal load by beginning readers}, series = {Journal of experimental psychology : general}, volume = {151}, journal = {Journal of experimental psychology : general}, number = {6}, publisher = {American Psychological Association}, address = {Washington}, issn = {0096-3445}, doi = {10.1037/xge0001140}, pages = {1219 -- 1232}, year = {2022}, abstract = {The perceptual span describes the size of the visual field from which information is obtained during a fixation in reading. Its size depends on characteristics of writing system and reader, but-according to the foveal load hypothesis-it is also adjusted dynamically as a function of lexical processing difficulty. Using the moving window paradigm to manipulate the amount of preview, here we directly test whether the perceptual span shrinks as foveal word difficulty increases. We computed the momentary size of the span from word-based eye-movement measures as a function of foveal word frequency, allowing us to separately describe the perceptual span for information affecting spatial saccade targeting and temporal saccade execution. First fixation duration and gaze duration on the upcoming (parafoveal) word N + 1 were significantly shorter when the current (foveal) word N was more frequent. We show that the word frequency effect is modulated by window size. Fixation durations on word N + 1 decreased with high-frequency words N, but only for large windows, that is, when sufficient parafoveal preview was available. This provides strong support for the foveal load hypothesis. To investigate the development of the foveal load effect, we analyzed data from three waves of a longitudinal study on the perceptual span with German children in Grades 1 to 6. Perceptual span adjustment emerged early in development at around second grade and remained stable in later grades. We conclude that the local modulation of the perceptual span indicates a general cognitive process, perhaps an attentional gradient with rapid readjustment.}, language = {en} } @article{MeixnerWarnerLensingetal.2018, author = {Meixner, Johannes M. and Warner, Greta J. and Lensing, Johanna Nele and Schiefele, Ulrich and Elsner, Birgit}, title = {The relation between executive functions and reading comprehension in primary-school students}, series = {Early Childhood Research Quarterly}, volume = {46}, journal = {Early Childhood Research Quarterly}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {New York}, issn = {0885-2006}, doi = {10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.04.010}, pages = {62 -- 74}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Higher-order cognitive skills are necessary prerequisites for reading and understanding words, sentences and texts. In particular, research on executive functions in the cognitive domain has shown that good executive functioning in children is positively related to reading comprehension skills and that deficits in executive functioning are related to difficulties with reading comprehension. However, developmental research on literacy and self-regulation in the early school years suggests that the relation between higher-order cognitive skills and reading might not be unidirectional, but mutually interdependent in nature. Therefore, the present longitudinal study explored the bidirectional relations between executive functions and reading comprehension during primary school across a 1-year period. At two time points (T1, T2), we assessed reading comprehension at the word, sentence, and text levels as well as three components of executive functioning, that is, updating, inhibition, and attention shifting. The sample consisted of three sequential cohorts of German primary school students (N = 1657) starting in first, second, and third grade respectively (aged 6-11 years at T1). Using a latent cross-lagged-panel design, we found bidirectional longitudinal relations between executive functions and reading comprehension for second and third graders. However, for first graders, only the path from executive functioning at T1 to reading comprehension at T2 attained significance. Succeeding analyses revealed updating as the crucial component of the effect from executive functioning on later reading comprehension, whereas text reading comprehension was most predictive of later executive functioning. The potential processes underlying the observed bidirectional relations are discussed with respect to developmental changes in reading comprehension across the primary years.}, language = {en} }