The Impact of Lexical Simplification by Verbal Paraphrases for People with and without Dyslexia

Text simplification is the process of transforming a text into an equivalent which is easier to read and to understand, preserving its meaning for a target population. One such population who could benefit from text simplification are people with dyslexia. One of the alternatives for text simplification is the use of verbal paraphrases. One of the more common verbal paraphrase pairs are the one composed by a lexical verb (to hug) and by a support verb plus a noun collocation (to give a hug). This paper explores how Spanish verbal paraphrases impact the readability and the comprehension of people with and without dyslexia dyslexia. For the selection of pairs of verbal paraphrases we have used the Badele.3000 database, a linguistic resource composed of more than 3,600 verbal paraphrases. To measure the impact in reading performance and understandability, we performed an eye-tracking study including comprehension questionnaires. The study is based on a group of 46 participants, 23 with confirmed dyslexia and 23 control group. We did not find significant effects, thus tools that can perform this kind of paraphrases automatically might not have a large effect on people with dyslexia. Therefore, other kinds of text simplification might be needed to benefit readability and understandability of people with dyslexia.

[1]  K. Rayner,et al.  Measuring word recognition in reading: eye movements and event-related potentials , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[2]  Luz Rello,et al.  False Paraphrase Pairs in Spanish for Verbs and Verb+Noun Collocations , 2011, Proces. del Leng. Natural.

[3]  F. Simmons,et al.  The reading comprehension abilities of dyslexic students in higher education. , 2000, Dyslexia.

[4]  Lijun Feng,et al.  Comparing evaluation techniques for text readability software for adults with intellectual disabilities , 2009, Assets '09.

[5]  Ricardo Baeza-Yates,et al.  Lexical quality as a proxy for web text understandability , 2012, WWW.

[6]  Horacio Saggion,et al.  Text Simplification Tools for Spanish , 2012, LREC.

[7]  Kentaro Inui,et al.  Text Simplification for Reading Assistance: A Project Note , 2003, IWP@ACL.

[8]  Jörg Tiedemann,et al.  Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'12) , 2012 .

[9]  Nitin Madnani,et al.  Generating Phrasal and Sentential Paraphrases: A Survey of Data-Driven Methods , 2010, CL.

[10]  M A Just,et al.  A theory of reading: from eye fixations to comprehension. , 1980, Psychological review.

[11]  Patricia A. Urban,et al.  Coping with Diversity , 2003 .

[12]  Ricardo Baeza-Yates,et al.  The presence of English and Spanish dyslexia in the Web , 2012, New Rev. Hypermedia Multim..

[13]  A. Caramazza.  How many levels of processing are there in lexical access , 1997 .

[14]  A. Caramazza,et al.  Lexical access and inflectional morphology , 1988, Cognition.

[15]  J. Hyönä,et al.  Eye fixation patterns among dyslexic and normal readers: effects of word length and word frequency. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[16]  Horacio Saggion,et al.  Text Simplification in Simplext. Making Text More Accessible , 2011, Proces. del Leng. Natural.

[17]  Siobhan Devlin,et al.  Helping aphasic people process online information , 2006, Assets '06.

[18]  K. Nation,et al.  Individual differences in contextual facilitation: evidence from dyslexia and poor reading comprehension. , 1998, Child development.

[19]  Siobhan Devlin,et al.  Simplifying Text for Language-Impaired Readers , 1999, EACL.

[20]  B. Riddick,et al.  Adult dyslexic writing , 1998 .

[21]  Ricardo Baeza-Yates,et al.  Layout guidelines for web text and a web service to improve accessibility for dyslexics , 2012, W4A.

[22]  K. Rayner,et al.  Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity , 1986, Memory & cognition.

[23]  Panayiotis Zaphiris,et al.  Web Navigation for Individuals with Dyslexia: An Exploratory Study , 2007, HCI.

[24]  Horacio Saggion,et al.  Towards Automatic Lexical Simplification in Spanish: An Empirical Study , 2012, PITR@NAACL-HLT.

[25]  D. Baxter.  Surface Dyslexia: Neuropsychological and Cognitive Studies of Phonological Reading , 1987 .

[26]  Ricardo Baeza-Yates,et al.  Graphical Schemes May Improve Readability but Not Understandability for People with Dyslexia , 2012, PITR@NAACL-HLT.

[27]  María Auxiliadora Barrios Rodríguez.  El dominio de la funciones léxicas en el marco de la teoría sentido-texto , 2010 .

[28]  María A. Barrios,et al.  Enriching a Lexicographic Tool with Domain Definitions: Problems and Solutions , 2009 .

[29]  Mark Dixon,et al.  Comparative Study of Disabled vs. Non-disabled Evaluators in User-Testing: Dyslexia and First Year Students Learning Computer Programming , 2007, HCI.

[30]  Horacio Saggion,et al.  Can Spanish Be Simpler? LexSiS: Lexical Simplification for Spanish , 2012, COLING.

[31]  Ehud Reiter,et al.  Experiments with discourse-level choices and readability , 2003, ENLG@EACL.

[32]  J. Fletcher,et al.  Specific reading disability (dyslexia): what have we learned in the past four decades? , 2004, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[33]  Regina Barzilay,et al.  Inferring Strategies for Sentence Ordering in Multidocument News Summarization , 2002, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[34]  Richard Sinatra,et al.  Improving reading comprehension of disabled readers through semantic mapping , 1984 .

[35]  David J. Brown,et al.  Text formats and web design for visually impaired and dyslexic readers - Clear Text for All , 2005, Interact. Comput..

[36]  E. Mahone,et al.  Effects of fluency, oral language, and executive function on reading comprehension performance , 2009, Annals of dyslexia.