Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (2)
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- Eye movements (1)
- Longitudinal study (1)
- Moving window (1)
- Nonlinear mixed-effects modeling (1)
- Perceptual span (1)
- Reading development (1)
Institute
- Department Psychologie (2) (remove)
The perceptual span is a standard measure of parafoveal processing, which is considered highly important for efficient reading. Is the perceptual span a stable indicator of reading performance? What drives its development? Do initially slower and faster readers converge or diverge over development? Here we present the first longitudinal data on the development of the perceptual span in elementary school children. Using the moving window technique, eye movements of 127 German children in three age groups (Grades 1, 2, and 3 in Year 1) were recorded at two time points (T1 and T2) 1 year apart. Introducing a new measure of the perceptual span, nonlinear mixed-effects modeling was used to separate window size effects from asymptotic reading performance. Cross-sectional differences were well replicated longitudinally. Asymptotic reading rate increased monotonously with grade, but in a decelerating fashion. A significant change in the perceptual span was observed only between Grades 2 and 3. Together with results from a cross-lagged panel model, this suggests that the perceptual span increases as a consequence of relatively well established word reading. Stabilities of observed and predicted reading rates were high after Grade 1, whereas the perceptual span was only moderately stable for all grades. Comparing faster and slower readers as assessed at T1, in general, a pattern of stable between-group differences emerged rather than a compensatory pattern; second and third graders even showed a Matthew effect in reading rate and the perceptual span, respectively. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
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.