Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (15)
- Postprint (10)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (1)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
- Preprint (1)
- Review (1)
Keywords
- acute kidney injury (2)
- end-stage kidney disease (2)
- genome-wide association (2)
- rapid eGFRcrea decline (2)
- study (2)
- Additive and interactive effects (1)
- Bayesian brain (1)
- Brassica vegetables (1)
- Cloze probability (1)
- Data transformation (1)
Institute
- Department Psychologie (19)
- Extern (4)
- Hasso-Plattner-Institut für Digital Engineering GmbH (3)
- Department Linguistik (2)
- Institut für Ernährungswissenschaft (2)
- Institut für Biochemie und Biologie (1)
- Institut für Chemie (1)
- Institut für Physik und Astronomie (1)
- Strukturbereich Kognitionswissenschaften (1)
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.
Additive and interactive effects of word frequency, stimulus quality, and semantic priming have been used to test theoretical claims about the cognitive architecture of word-reading processes. Additive effects among these factors have been taken as evidence for discrete-stage models of word reading. We present evidence from linear mixed-model analyses applied to 2 lexical decision experiments indicating that apparent additive effects can be the product of aggregating over- and underadditive interaction effects that are modulated by recent trial history, particularly the lexical status and stimulus quality of the previous trial's target. Even a simple practice effect expressed as improved response speed across trials was powerfully modulated by the nature of the previous target item. These results suggest that additivity and interaction between factors may reflect trial-to-trial variation in stimulus representations and decision processes rather than fundamental differences in processing architecture.
Replicability of findings is at the heart of any empirical science. The aim of this article is to move the current replicability debate in psychology towards concrete recommendations for improvement. We focus on research practices but also offer guidelines for reviewers, editors, journal management, teachers, granting institutions, and university promotion committees, highlighting some of the emerging and existing practical solutions that can facilitate implementation of these recommendations. The challenges for improving replicability in psychological science are systemic. Improvement can occur only if changes are made at many levels of practice, evaluation, and reward.
I. Introduction A. Theoretical Framework and Selection of Tests B. Related Studies of Reading Disability Subtypes C. Overview of Specific Questions and Article Outline II. Selection criteria nd performance on standardized measures III. Group differences between disabled and normal readers A. Phonetic Memory B. Picture-Naming Speed and Automatic Responses to Print C. Phonological and Orthographic Skill D. Easy Regular and Exception Word Reading E. Difficult Regular and Exception Words IV. Individual diferences in reading disability A. Phonological Skill, Orthographic Skill, and the Regularity Effect B. Phonological Skill, Orthographic Skill, and Spelling Errors V. Eye movement reading style A. The "Plodder-Explorer" Dimension of Eye Movement Reading Style B. Eye Movements, Coding Skills, and Spelling Ratings C. Verbal Intelligence and the Plodder-Explorer Dimension D. Eye Movements in a Nonreading Task and the "Visual-Spatial" Subtype VI. Distribution and etiology of reading disabilities A. Distribution Issues B. Etiology of Reading Disabilities VII. Summary and new directions in research
Contents: I. Introduction II. Word Coding Processes A. Word Recognition B. Orthographic Coding C. Phonological Coding III. Eye Monitor and Reading Task IV. Group Differences V. Dimensions of Individual Differences A. Regressive Fixation Index and Word Recognition B. Regressive Fixation Index and IQ C. Regressive Fixation Index and Saccade Length D. Regressive Fixation Index and Relative Phonological Skill VI. Multiple Regression Models of Individual Differences A. Disabled Readers in the Aloud Condition B. Disabled Readers in the Silent Condition C. Normal Readers in Silent and Aloud Conditions VII. Conclusions