Two experiments examined readers’ use of parafoveally obtained word length information for word recognition. Both experiments manipulated the length (number of constituent characters) of a parafoveally previewed target word so that it was either accurately or inaccurately specified. In Experiment 1, previews also either revealed or denied useful orthographic information. In Experiment 2, parafoveal targets were either high- or low-frequency words. Eye movement contingent display changes were used to show the intact target upon its fixation. Examination of target viewing duration showed completely additive effects of word length previews and of ortho-graphic previews in Experiment 1, viewing duration being shorter in the accurate-length and the orthographic preview conditions. Experiment 2 showed completely additive effects of word length and word frequency, target viewing being shorter in the accurate-length and the high-frequency conditions. Together these results indicate that functionally distinct subsystems control the use of parafoveally visible spatial and linguistic information in reading. Parafoveally visible spatial information appears to be used for two distinct extralinguistic computations: visual object selection and saccade specification.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BalotaD. A.ChumbleyJ. I. (1984). Are lexical decisions a good measure of access? The role of word frequency in the neglected decision stage.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance10, 340–357.
2.
BeauvillainC.VergilinoD.DukicT. (2000). Planning two-saccade sequences in reading.Reading as a perceptual process.KennedyA.RadachR.HellerD.PynteJ.Oxford: Elsevier Science327–354.
3.
BlanchardH. E.PollatsekA.RaynerK. (1989). The acquisition of parafoveal word information in reading.Perception & Psychophysics46, 85–94.
4.
BriihlD.InhoffA. W. (1995). Integrating information across fixations during reading: The use of orthographic bodies and of exterior letters.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition21, 55–67.
5.
ClarkJ. J.O'ReganJ. K. (1999). Word ambiguity and the optimal viewing position in reading.Vision Research39, 843–857.
6.
ConnineCMullenixJ.ShernoffE.YelenJ. (1990). Word familiarity and word frequency in visual and auditory word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition16, 1084–1096.
7.
CraneH. D.SteeleC. M. (1985). Generation-V dual-Purkinje-image eye tracker.Applied Optics24, 527–537.
8.
DahanD.MagnusonJ. S.TanenhausM. K. (2001). Time course of frequency effects in spoken-word recognition: Evidence from eye movements.Cognitive Psychology42, 317–367.
9.
DeubelH.BridgemanB.SchneiderW. X. (1998). Immediate post-saccadic information mediate space constancy.Vision Research38, 3147–3159.
10.
EpelboimJ.BoothJ. R.SteinmanR. M. (1994). Reading unspaced text: implications for theories of reading eye movements.Vision Research34, 1735–1766.
11.
FisherD. F. (1976). Spatial factors in reading and search: The case for space.Eye movements and psychological processes.MontyR. A.SendersJ. W.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc417–427.
12.
HaberL. R.HaberR. N. (1983). Word length and word shape as sources of information in reading.Reading-Research-Quarterly18, 165–189.
13.
HendersonJ. M.FerreiraF. (1990). Effects of foveal processing difficulty on the perceptual span in reading: Implications for attention and eye movement control.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition17, 417–429.
14.
InhoffA. W. (1986). Preparing sequences of saccades under choice reaction conditions: Effects of sequence length and context.Acta Psychologica61, 211–228.
15.
InhoffA. W.EiterB.Knowledge of word length does not constrain word identification.Psychological Research. in press.
16.
InhoffA. W.LiuW. (1998). The perceptual span and oculomotor activity during the reading of Chinese sentences.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance24, 20–34.
17.
InhoffA. W.RadachR. (1998). Definition and computation of oculomotor measures in the study of cognitive processes.Eye guidance in reading and scene perception.UnderwoodG.Oxford: Elsevier29–54.
18.
InhoffA. W.RadachR.HellerD. (2000a). Complex compounds in German: Interword spaces facilitate segmentation but hinder assignment of meaning.Journal of Memory and Language42, 23–50.
19.
InhoffA. W.RaynerK. (1986). Parafoveal word processing during eye fixations in reading: Effects of word frequency.Perception & Psychophysics40, 431–439.
20.
InhoffA. W.StarrM.LiuW.WangJ. (1998). Eye-movement-contingent display changes are not compromised by flicker and phosphor persistence.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review5, 101–106.
21.
InhoffA. W.StarrM.ShindlerK. (2000b). Is the processing of words during eye fixations in reading strictly serial?.Perception & Psychophysics62, 1474–1484.
22.
InhoffA. W.TopolskiR. (1994). Use of phonological codes during eye fixations in reading and in on-line and delayed naming tasks.Journal of Memory and Language33, 689–713.
23.
InhoffA. W.TousmanS. (1990). Lexical priming from partial word previews.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition16, 825–836.
24.
JaredD.LevyB. A.RaynerK. (1999). The role of phonology in the activation of word meanings during reading: Evidence from proofreading and eye movements.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General128, 219–264.
25.
KennisonS. M.CliftonC. (1995). Determinants of parafoveal preview benefit in high and low working memory capacity readers: Implications for eye movement control.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition21, 68–81.
26.
KowlerE.AntonS. (1986). Reading twisted text: Implications for the role of saccades.Vision Research1, 45–60.
27.
KuceraH.FrancisW. N. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American EnglishProvidence, RI: Brown University Press.
28.
LimaS. D.InhoffA. W. (1985). Lexical access during eye fixations in reading: Effects of word-initial letter sequence.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance77, 272–285.
29.
MaltB.SeamonJ. G. (1978). Peripheral and cognitive components of eye guidance in filled space reading.Perception & Psychophysics23, 399–402.
30.
McConkieG. W.KerrP. W.ReddixM. D.ZolaD.JacobsA. M. (1989). Eye movement control during reading. II: Frequency of refixating a word.Perception & Psychophysics46, 245–253.
31.
McConkieG. W.RaynerK. (1975). The span of the effective stimulus during a fixation in reading.Perception & Psychophysics17, 578–586.
32.
MorrisR. K.RaynerK.PollatsekA. (1989). Eye movement guidance in reading: The role of parafoveal letter and space information.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance16, 268–281.
33.
MorrisonR. E. (1984). Manipulation of stimulus onset delay in reading: Evidence for parallel programming of saccades.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance10, 667–682.
34.
O'ReganJ. K. (1979). Saccade size control in reading: Evidence for the linguistic control hypothesis.Perception & Psychophysics25, 501–509.
35.
O'ReganJ. K. (1990). Eye movements in reading.Eye movements and their role in visual and cognitive processes: Reviews of oculomotor research.KowlerE.Amsterdam: Elsevier.
36.
PlourdeC. E.BesnerD. (1997). On the locus of the word frequency effect in visual word recognition.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology51, 181–194.
37.
PollatsekA.RaynerK. (1982). Eye movement control in reading: The role of word boundaries.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance8, 817–833.
38.
PollatsekA.ReichleE. D.RaynerK. (2002). Extensions of the E-Z reader model.The mind's eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movements.HyönäJ.RadachR.DeubelH.Oxford: Elsevier Science.
39.
RaynerK. (1975). The perceptual span and peripheral cues in reading.Cognitive Psychology7, 65–81.
40.
RaynerK. (1979). Eye guidance in reading: Fixation locations within words.Perception8, 21–30.
41.
RaynerK. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research.Psychological Bulletin124, 372–422.
42.
RaynerK.BerteraJ. H. (1979). Reading without a fovea.Science206, 468–469.
43.
RaynerK.DuffyS. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity.Memory & Cognition14, 191–201.
44.
RaynerK.FischerM.PollatsekA. (1998). Unspaced text interferes with both word identification and eye movement control.Vision Research38, 1129–1140.
45.
RaynerK.McConkieG. W.ZolaD. (1980). Integrating information across eye movements.Cognitive Psychology12, 206–226.
46.
RaynerK.PollatsekA. (1981). Eye movement control during reading: Evidence for direct control.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology33a, 351–373.
47.
RaynerK.WellA. D.PollatsekA.BerteraJ. H. (1982). The availability of useful information to the right of fixation in reading.Perception & Psychophysics31, 537–550.
48.
ReichleE. D.PollatsekA.FisherD. L.RaynerK. (1998). Toward a model of eye movement control in reading.Psychological Reviev105, 125–157.
49.
SerenoS.RaynerK. (2000). Spelling-sound regularity effects on eye fixations in reading.Perception & Psychophysics62, 402–409.
