Refine
Year of publication
- 2012 (3) (remove)
Language
- English (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (3) (remove)
Keywords
- eye movements (3) (remove)
During reading, saccadic eye movements are generated to shift words into the center of the visual field for lexical processing. Recently, Krugel and Engbert (Vision Research 50:1532-1539, 2010) demonstrated that within-word fixation positions are largely shifted to the left after skipped words. However, explanations of the origin of this effect cannot be drawn from normal reading data alone. Here we show that the large effect of skipped words on the distribution of within-word fixation positions is primarily based on rather subtle differences in the low-level visual information acquired before saccades. Using arrangements of "x" letter strings, we reproduced the effect of skipped character strings in a highly controlled single-saccade task. Our results demonstrate that the effect of skipped words in reading is the signature of a general visuomotor phenomenon. Moreover, our findings extend beyond the scope of the widely accepted range-error model, which posits that within-word fixation positions in reading depend solely on the distances of target words. We expect that our results will provide critical boundary conditions for the development of visuomotor models of saccade planning during reading.
Current models of eye movement control are derived from theories assuming serial processing of single items or from theories based on parallel processing of multiple items at a time. This issue has persisted because most investigated paradigms generated data compatible with both serial and parallel models. Here, we study eye movements in a sequential scanning task, where stimulus n indicates the position of the next stimulus n + 1. We investigate whether eye movements are controlled by sequential attention shifts when the task requires serial order of processing. Our measures of distributed processing in the form of parafoveal-on-foveal effects, long-range modulations of target selection, and skipping saccades provide evidence against models strictly based on serial attention shifts. We conclude that our results lend support to parallel processing as a strategy for eye movement control.
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.