Refine
Keywords
- eye movements (2)
- Z-reader model (1)
- accuracy (1)
- eccentricity (1)
- eye-movement control (1)
- fixation duration (1)
- gaze (1)
- microsaccades (1)
- oculomotor control (1)
- psychophysics toolbox (1)
Institute
Reading requires the orchestration of visual, attentional, language-related, and oculomotor processing constraints. This study replicates previous effects of frequency, predictability, and length of fixated words on fixation durations in natural reading and demonstrates new effects of these variables related to previous and next words. Results are based on fixation durations recorded from 222 persons, each reading 144 sentences. Such evidence for distributed processing of words across fixation durations challenges psycholinguistic immediacy-of-processing and eye-mind assumptions. Most of the time the mind processes several words in parallel at different perceptual and cognitive levels. Eye movements can help to unravel these processes.
Reading requires the orchestration of visual, attentional, language-related, and oculomotor processing constraints. This study replicates previous effects of frequency, predictability, and length of fixated words on fixation durations in natural reading and demonstrates new effects of these variables related to previous and next words. Results are based on fixation durations recorded from 222 persons, each reading 144 sentences. Such evidence for distributed processing of words across fixation durations challenges psycholinguistic immediacy-of-processing and eye- mind assumptions. Most of the time the mind processes several words in parallel at different perceptual and cognitive levels. Eye movements can help to unravel these processes
Fixation durations in reading are longer for within-word fixation positions close to word center than for positions near word boundaries. This counterintuitive result was termed the Inverted-Optimal Viewing Position (IOVP) effect. We proposed an explanation of the effect based on error-correction of mislocated fixations [Nuthmann, A., Engbert, R., & Kliegl, R. (2005). Mislocated fixations during reading and the inverted optimal viewing position effect. Vision Research, 45, 2201-2217], that suggests that the IOVP effect is not related to word processing. Here we demonstrate the existence of an IOVP effect in "mindless reading", a G-string scanning task. We compare the results from experimental data with results obtained from computer simulations of a simple model of the IOVP effect and discuss alternative accounts. We conclude that oculornotor errors, which often induce mislocalized fixations, represent the most important source of the IOVP effect. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
The present study explores the role of the word position-in-text in sentence and paragraph reading. Three eye-movement data sets based on the reading of Dutch and German unrelated sentences reveal a sizeable, replicable increase in reading times over several words in the beginning and the end of sentences. The data from the paragraphbased English-language Dundee corpus replicate the pattern and also indicate that the increase in inspection times is driven by the visual boundaries of the text organized in lines, rather than by syntactic sentence boundaries. We argue that this effect is independent of several established lexical, contextual and oculomotor predictors of eye-movement behavior. We also provide evidence that the effect of word position-intext has two independent components: a start-up effect arguably caused by a strategic oculomotor program of saccade planning over the line of text, and a wrap-up effect originating in cognitive processes of comprehension and semantic integration.
Mathematical models have become an important tool for understanding the control of eye movements during reading. Main goals of the development of the SWIFT model (Engbert, Longtin, & Kliegl, 2002)were to investigate the possibility of spatially distributed processing and to implement a general mechanism for all types of eye movements we observe in reading experiments. Here, we present an advanced version of SWIFT which integrates properties of the oculomotor system and effects of word recognition to explain many of the experimental phenomena faced in reading research. We propose new procedures for the estimation of model parameters and for the test of the model’s performance. A mathematical analysis of the dynamics of the SWIFT model is presented. Finally, within this framework, we present an analysis of the transition from parallel to serial processing.
Mathematical, models,have become an important tool for understanding the control of eye movements during reading. Main goals of the development of the SWIFT model (R. Engbert, A. Longtin, & R. Kliegl, 2002) were to investigate the possibility of spatially distributed processing and to implement a general mechanism for all types of eye movements observed in reading experiments. The authors present an advanced version of SWIFT that integrates properties of the oculomotor system and effects of word recognition to explain many of the experimental phenomena faced in reading research. They propose new procedures for the estimation of model parameters and for the test of the model's performance. They also present a mathematical analysis of the dynamics of the SWIFT model. Finally, within this framework, they present an analysis of the transition from parallel to serial processing
Saccades to single targets in peripheral vision are typically characterized by an undershoot bias. Putting this bias to a test, Kapoula [1] used a paradigm in which observers were presented with two different sets of target eccentricities that partially overlapped each other. Her data were suggestive of a saccadic range effect (SRE): There was a tendency for saccades to overshoot close targets and undershoot far targets in a block, suggesting that there was a response bias towards the center of eccentricities in a given block. Our Experiment 1 was a close replication of the original study by Kapoula [1]. In addition, we tested whether the SRE is sensitive to top-down requirements associated with the task, and we also varied the target presentation duration. In Experiments 1 and 2, we expected to replicate the SRE for a visual discrimination task. The simple visual saccade-targeting task in Experiment 3, entailing minimal top-down influence, was expected to elicit a weaker SRE. Voluntary saccades to remembered target locations in Experiment 3 were expected to elicit the strongest SRE. Contrary to these predictions, we did not observe a SRE in any of the tasks. Our findings complement the results reported by Gillen et al. [2] who failed to find the effect in a saccade-targeting task with a very brief target presentation. Together, these results suggest that unlike arm movements, saccadic eye movements are not biased towards making saccades of a constant, optimal amplitude for the task.
Saccades to single targets in peripheral vision are typically characterized by an undershoot bias. Putting this bias to a test, Kapoula [1] used a paradigm in which observers were presented with two different sets of target eccentricities that partially overlapped each other. Her data were suggestive of a saccadic range effect (SRE): There was a tendency for saccades to overshoot close targets and undershoot far targets in a block, suggesting that there was a response bias towards the center of eccentricities in a given block. Our Experiment 1 was a close replication of the original study by Kapoula [1]. In addition, we tested whether the SRE is sensitive to top-down requirements associated with the task, and we also varied the target presentation duration. In Experiments 1 and 2, we expected to replicate the SRE for a visual discrimination task. The simple visual saccade-targeting task in Experiment 3, entailing minimal top-down influence, was expected to elicit a weaker SRE. Voluntary saccades to remembered target locations in Experiment 3 were expected to elicit the strongest SRE. Contrary to these predictions, we did not observe a SRE in any of the tasks. Our findings complement the results reported by Gillen et al. [2] who failed to find the effect in a saccade-targeting task with a very brief target presentation. Together, these results suggest that unlike arm movements, saccadic eye movements are not biased towards making saccades of a constant, optimal amplitude for the task.
Refixation probability during reading is lowest near the word center, suggestive of an optimal viewing position (OVP). Counter-intuitively, fixation durations are largest at the OVP, a result called the inverted optimal viewing position (IOVP) effect [Vitu, McConkie, Kerr, & O'Regan, (2001). Vision Research 41, 3513-3533]. Current models of eye-movement control in reading fail to reproduce the IOVP effect. We propose a simple mechanism for generating this effect based on error-correction of mislocated fixations due to saccadic errors, First, we propose an algorithm for estimating proportions of mislocated fixations from experimental data yielding a higher probability for mislocated fixations near word boundaries. Second, we assume that mislocated fixations trigger an immediate start of a new saccade program causing a decrease of associated durations. Thus, the IOVP effect could emerge as a result of a coupling between cognitive and oculomotor processes. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved