Do frequency characteristics of nonfixated words influence the processing of fixated words during reading?

Are readers capable of lexically processing more than one word at a time? In five eye movement experiments, we examined to what extent lexical characteristics of the nonfixated word to the right of fixation influenced readers' eye behaviour on the fixated word. In three experiments, we varied the frequency of the initial constituent of two‐noun compounds, while in two experiments the whole‐word frequency was manipulated. The results showed that frequency characteristics of the parafoveal word sometimes affected eye behaviour prior to fixating it, but the direction of effects was not consistent and the effects were not replicated across all experiments. Follow‐up regression analyses suggested that foveal and parafoveal word length as well as the frequency of the word‐initial trigram of the parafoveal word may modulate the parafoveal‐on‐foveal effects. It is concluded that low‐frequency words or lexemes may under certain circumstances serve as a magnet to attract an early eye movement to them. However, further corroborative evidence is clearly needed.

[1]  J. H. Bertera,et al.  Masking of foveal and parafoveal vision during eye fixations in reading. , 1981, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[2]  Seth N. Greenberg,et al.  Allocation of Visuo-Spatial Attention and Saccade Programming During Reading , 2000 .

[3]  R. Radach,et al.  Chapter 7 – Relations Between Spatial and Temporal Aspects of Eye Movement Control , 2000 .

[4]  Erik D. Reichle,et al.  Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. , 1998, Psychological review.

[5]  A. Pollatsek,et al.  The role of morphological constituents in reading Finnish compound words. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[6]  Ralf Engbert,et al.  A dynamical model of saccade generation in reading based on spatially distributed lexical processing , 2002, Vision Research.

[7]  Jukka Hyönä,et al.  Do irregular letter combinations attract readers' attention? Evidence from fixation locations in words. , 1995 .

[8]  Erik D. Reichle,et al.  The E-Z Reader model of eye-movement control in reading: Comparisons to other models , 2003, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[9]  Simon P. Liversedge,et al.  Orthographic familiarity influences initial eye fixation positions in reading , 2004 .

[10]  M. Pickering,et al.  Eye guidance in reading and scene perception , 1998 .

[11]  J. L. Myers,et al.  Regression analyses of repeated measures data in cognitive research. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[12]  B. J. Davidson,et al.  19 – On Problems of Unconfounding Perceptual and Language Processes , 1983 .

[13]  D. Balota,et al.  Inferences about eye movement control from the perceptual span in reading , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  K. Rayner Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. , 1998, Psychological bulletin.

[15]  Wayne S. Murray,et al.  Parafoveal pragmatics revisited , 2004 .

[16]  G Underwood,et al.  How Do Readers Know Where to Look Next? Local Information Distributions Influence Eye Fixations , 1990, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[17]  A. Kennedy,et al.  Parafoveal-on-foveal interactions in word recognition , 2002, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[18]  Alexander Pollatsek,et al.  Unspaced text interferes with both word identification and eye movement control , 1998, Vision Research.

[19]  Alan Kennedy,et al.  Parafoveal Processing in Word Recognition , 2000, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[20]  A. Pollatsek,et al.  Reading Finnish compound words: eye fixations are affected by component morphemes. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[21]  A W Inhoff,et al.  Is the processing of words during eye fixations in reading strictly serial? , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[22]  J. Henderson,et al.  Eye movement control during reading: fixation measures reflect foveal but not parafoveal processing difficulty. , 1993, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[23]  Geoffrey Underwood,et al.  Attentional Demands on the Processing of Neighbouring Words , 2000 .

[24]  Alan Kennedy,et al.  The Influence of Parafoveal Words on Foveal Inspection Time: Evidence for a Processing Trade-Off , 1998 .