Exploring the lack of a disfluency effect: evidence from eye movements

An eye-tracking study with 60 native Swedish speakers (18–30 years) was conducted to investigate the positive effects on learning outcomes predicted by the disfluency effect. Subtle low-pass filtering was used as a disfluency manipulation and compared with a control condition using regular text. The text was presented on four separate text presentation screens (TPSs), and eye movements were recorded. A free recall task was given 25 min later, and working memory capacity (WMC) was assessed to test if it would moderate learning outcomes. The disfluency manipulation had no effect on learning outcomes, total reading times on words or lines, first- or second-pass reading on lines, or average fixation durations. Moreover, the disfluency effect was not moderated by students’ WMC or self-reported prior knowledge of the topic. However, an adaptation to the disfluency manipulation was found. Total reading times on both words and lines were shorter in TPS 1 and 2 in the disfluency condition compared with the control condition, whereas reading times were longer in TPS 3 and 4. It is discussed if failures to replicate the disfluency effect arise from material features, with positive adaptations to disfluency (i.e., higher effort investment) possibly requiring more comprehensive materials.

[1]  Thomas H. Killion,et al.  Interaction of visual and cognitive effects in word recognition. , 1977 .

[2]  P. Carpenter,et al.  Individual differences in working memory and reading , 1980 .

[3]  G. Legge,et al.  Psychophysics of reading—I. Normal vision , 1985, Vision Research.

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

[5]  P. Holcomb.  Semantic priming and stimulus degradation: implications for the role of the N400 in language processing. , 2007, Psychophysiology.

[6]  M. Daneman,et al.  Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis , 1996, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

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

[8]  C. Erkelens,et al.  Peripheral vision and oculomotor control during visual search , 1999, Vision Research.

[9]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Signaling as a Cognitive Guide in Multimedia Learning , 2001 .

[10]  Andrew R. A. Conway,et al.  A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[11]  Mike Rinck,et al.  Chapter 16 – Eye Movement Measures to Study Global Text Processing , 2003 .

[12]  G. Legge,et al.  49.1: Invited Paper: Psychophysics of Reading: Implications for Displaying Text , 2004 .

[13]  Michael F. Bunting,et al.  Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide , 2005, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[14]  Aaron B. Hoffman,et al.  Eyetracking and selective attention in category learning , 2005, Cognitive Psychology.

[15]  Richard P. Heitz,et al.  An automated version of the operation span task , 2005, Behavior research methods.

[16]  R. Engle,et al.  Individual differences in working memory capacity and learning: Evidence from the serial reaction time task , 2005, Memory & cognition.

[17]  K. Rayner,et al.  Examining the Word Identification Stages Hypothesized by the E-Z Reader Model , 2006, Psychological science.

[18]  K. Rayner,et al.  Eye movements in reading words and sentences , 2007 .

[19]  Stephanie Wilson,et al.  Identifying web usability problems from eye-tracking data , 2007 .

[20]  Sing-Hang Cheung,et al.  The effect of dioptric blur on reading performance , 2007, Vision Research.

[21]  R. Baayen,et al.  Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items , 2008 .

[22]  George L. Malcolm,et al.  Eye Movements and Visual Encoding During Scene Perception , 2009, Psychological science.

[23]  K. Rayner.  The 35th Sir Frederick Bartlett Lecture: Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search , 2009, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[24]  Bob Rehder,et al.  Feature inference learning and eyetracking , 2009 .

[25]  A. Renkl,et al.  How multiple external representations are used and how they can be made more useful , 2009 .

[26]  Dominique Sluijsmans,et al.  Toward a Synthesis of Cognitive Load Theory, Four-Component Instructional Design, and Self-Directed Learning , 2009 .

[27]  R. Engle,et al.  Working Memory Capacity and Self‐Regulation , 2010 .

[28]  Daniel M. Oppenheimer,et al.  Fortune favors the ( ): Effects of disfluency on educational outcomes , 2011, Cognition.

[29]  Sven P Heinrich,et al.  Binocular coordination during reading of blurred and nonblurred text. , 2011, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[30]  Cheryl I. Johnson,et al.  An eye movement analysis of the spatial contiguity effect in multimedia learning. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[31]  Timothy R. Jordan,et al.  Reading with a filtered fovea: The influence of visual quality at the point of fixation during reading , 2012, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[32]  R. Bjork,et al.  Self-regulated learning: beliefs, techniques, and illusions. , 2013, Annual review of psychology.

[33]  Patrik Pluchino,et al.  Do fourth graders integrate text and picture in processing and learning from an illustrated science text? Evidence from eye-movement patterns , 2013, Comput. Educ..

[34]  John Heritage,et al.  Changing Fonts in Education: How the Benefits Vary with Ability and Dyslexia , 2013 .

[35]  Robert A. Bjork,et al.  When disfluency is—and is not—a desirable difficulty: The influence of typeface clarity on metacognitive judgments and memory , 2013, Memory & cognition.

[36]  Marcus Nyström,et al.  How a picture facilitates the process of learning from text: Evidence for scaffolding , 2013 .

[37]  Katharina Scheiter,et al.  Disfluency Meets Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning: Does Harder‐to‐Read Mean Better‐to‐Understand? , 2014 .

[38]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[39]  Ty W. Boyer,et al.  Disfluent fonts don't help people solve math problems. , 2015, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[40]  K. Scheiter,et al.  Signals foster multimedia learning by supporting integration of highlighted text and diagram elements , 2015 .

[41]  Alexander Eitel,et al.  Effects of disfluency on cognitive and metacognitive processes and outcomes , 2016 .

[42]  Tina Seufert,et al.  Working memory capacity and disfluency effect: an aptitude-treatment-interaction study , 2016 .