Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (13)
Year of publication
- 2013 (13) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (11)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
- Preprint (1)
Language
- English (13)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (13)
Keywords
- Eye movements (2)
- Linear mixed model (2)
- Reading (2)
- Boundary paradigm (1)
- Chinese (1)
- Computational modeling (1)
- Distributed processing (1)
- Dyslexia (1)
- Eye movement (1)
- Eye movements in reading (1)
- Fixational selectivity (1)
- Parafoveal processing (1)
- Parafoveal-on-foveal effects (1)
- Parsing difficulty (1)
- Perceptual span (1)
- Preview effects (1)
- Rapid automatized naming (1)
- Reading strategy (1)
- Sentence comprehension (1)
- Surprisal (1)
- Working memory (1)
- additive and interactive effects (1)
- binocular combination (1)
- children (1)
- confirmation bias (1)
- effects of trial history (1)
- fixation durations (1)
- generalizability (1)
- inhibition (1)
- interference model (1)
- lexical decision (1)
- linear mixed models (1)
- monocular deprivation (1)
- oculomotor control (1)
- old adults and young adults (1)
- preview benefit (1)
- publication bias (1)
- reading (1)
- replicability (1)
- research transparency (1)
- semantic (1)
- sensory balance (1)
- sentence reading (1)
- stimulus-onset delay (1)
- working memory capacity (1)
Institute
We tested the limits of working-memory capacity (WMC) of young adults, old adults, and children with a memory-updating task. The task consisted of mentally shifting spatial positions within a grid according to arrows, their color signaling either only go (control) or go/no-go conditions. The interference model (IM) of Oberauer and Kliegl (2006) was simultaneously fitted to the data of all groups. In addition to the 3 main model parameters (feature overlap, noise, and processing rate), we estimated the time for switching between go and no-go steps as a new model parameter. In this study, we examined the IM parameters across the life span. The IM parameter estimates show that (a) conditions were not different in interference by feature overlap and interference by confusion; (b) switching costs time; (c) young adults and children were less susceptible than old adults to interference due to feature overlap; (d) noise was highest for children, followed by old and young adults; (e) old adults differed from children and young adults in lower processing rate; and (f) children and old adults had a larger switch cost between go steps and no-go steps. Thus, the results of this study indicated that across age, the IM parameters contribute distinctively for explaining the limits of WMC.
It is well established that fixation durations during reading vary with processing difficulty, but there are different views on how oculomotor control, visual perception, shifts of attention, and lexical (and higher cognitive) processing are coordinated. Evidence for a one-to-one translation of input delay into saccadic latency would provide a much needed constraint for current theoretical proposals. Here, we tested predictions of such a direct-control perspective using the stimulus-onset delay (SOD) paradigm. Words in sentences were initially masked and, on fixation, were individually unmasked with a delay (0-, 33-, 66-, 99-ms SODs). In Experiment 1, SODs were constant for all words in a sentence; in Experiment 2, SODs were manipulated on target words, while nontargets were unmasked without delay. In accordance with predictions of direct control, nonzero SODs entailed equivalent increases in fixation durations in both experiments. Yet, a population of short fixations pointed to rapid saccades as a consequence of low-level information at nonoptimal viewing positions rather than of lexical processing. Implications of these results for theoretical accounts of oculomotor control are discussed.
We measured Chinese dyslexic and control children's eye movements during rapid automatized naming (RAN) with alphanumeric (digits) and symbolic (dice surfaces) stimuli. Both types of stimuli required identical oral responses, controlling for effects associated with speech production. Results showed that naming dice was much slower than naming digits for both groups, but group differences in eye-movement measures and in the eye-voice span (i.e. the distance between the currently fixated item and the voiced item) were generally larger in digit-RAN than in dice-RAN. In addition, dyslexics were less efficient in parafoveal processing in these RAN tasks. Since the two RAN tasks required the same phonological output and on the assumption that naming dice is less practiced than naming digits in general, the results suggest that the translation of alphanumeric visual symbols into phonological codes is less efficient in dyslexic children. The dissociation of the print-to-sound conversion and phonological representation suggests that the degree of automaticity in translation from visual symbols to phonological codes in addition to phonological processing per se is also critical to understanding dyslexia.