Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Reading is a highly complex learned skill in which humans move their eyes three to four times every second in response to visual and cognitive processing. The consensus view is that the details of these rapid eye-movement decisions—which part of a word to target with a saccade—are determined solely by low-level oculomotor heuristics. But maximally efficient saccade targeting would be sensitive to ongoing word identification, sending the eyes farther into a word the farther its identification has already progressed. Here, using a covert text-shifting paradigm, we showed just such a statistical relationship between saccade targeting in reading and trial-to-trial variability in cognitive processing. This result suggests that, rather than relying purely on heuristics, the human brain has learned to optimize eye movements in reading even at the fine-grained level of character-position targeting, reflecting efficiency-based sensitivity to ongoing cognitive processing.

Keywords

reading eye movements psycholinguistics motor control open data open materials

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Agresti

(2002). Categorical data analysis (2nd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Becker

Jürgens

(1979). An analysis of the saccadic system by means of double step stimuli. Vision Research, 19, 967–983.

Bicknell

Levy

(2010). A rational model of eye movement control in reading. In Hajicˇ

Carberry

Clark

Nivre

(Eds.), Proceedings of the 48th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 1168–1178). Uppsala, Sweden: Association for Computational Linguistics.

Bicknell

Levy

(2012). The utility of modelling word identification from visual input within models of eye movements in reading. Visual Cognition, 20, 422–456.

Dehaene

Cohen

(2011). The unique role of the visual word form area in reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 254–262.

Efron

(1987). Better bootstrap confidence intervals. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82(397), 171–185.

Engbert

Longtin

Kliegl

(2002). A dynamical model of saccade generation in reading based on spatially distributed lexical processing. Vision Research, 42, 621–636.

Feng

(2009). Mixed responses: Why readers spend less time at unfavorable landing positions. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 3(2). DOI: doi:10.16910/jemr.3.2.2

Henderson

J. M.

(2017). Gaze control as prediction. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21, 15–23.

10.

Inhoff

A. W.

Weger

U. W.

Radach

(2005). Sources of information for the programming of short- and long-range regressions during reading. In Underwood

(Ed.), Cognitive processes in eye guidance (pp. 33–52). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

11.

Körding

K. P.

Wolpert

D. M.

(2004). Bayesian integration in sensorimotor learning. Nature, 427, 244–247.

12.

Legge

G. E.

Hooven

T. A.

Klitz

T. S.

Mansfield

J. S.

Tjan

B. S.

(2002). Mr. Chips 2002: New insights from an ideal-observer model of reading. Vision Research, 42, 2219–2234.

13.

Legge

G. E.

Klitz

T. S.

Tjan

B. S.

(1997). Mr. Chips: An ideal-observer model of reading. Psychological Review, 104, 524–553.

14.

Lewis

R. L.

Shvartsman

Singh

S. P.

(2013). The adaptive nature of eye movements in linguistic tasks: How payoff and architecture shape speed-accuracy trade-offs. Topics in Cognitive Science, 5, 581–610.

15.

Liu

Rayner

(2011). Eye movement guidance in Chinese reading: Is there a preferred viewing location? Vision Research, 51, 1146–1156.

16.

Marslen-Wilson

(1975). Sentence perception as an interactive parallel process. Science, 189, 226–228.

17.

McConkie

G. W.

Kerr

P. W.

Reddix

M. D.

Zola

(1988). Eye movement control during reading: I. The location of initial eye fixations on words. Vision Research, 28, 1107–1118.

18.

McConkie

G. W.

Rayner

(1975). The span of the effective stimulus during a fixation in reading. Perception and Psychophysics, 17, 578–586.

19.

McConkie

G. W.

Zola

Wolverton

G. S.

(1980, April). How precise is eye guidance in reading? Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.

20.

Najemnik

Geisler

W. S.

(2005). Optimal eye movement strategies in visual search. Nature, 434, 387–391.

21.

Nuthmann

(2006). The “where” and “when” of eye fixations in reading (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Potsdam, Germany.

22.

O’Regan

J. K.

(1981). The “convenient viewing position” hypothesis. In Fisher

D. F.

Monty

R. A.

Senders

J. W.

(Eds.), Eye movements: Cognition and visual perception (pp. 289–298). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

23.

O’Regan

J. K.

Lévy-Schoen

Pynte

Brugaillère

(1984). Convenient fixation location within isolated words of different length and structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 250–257.

24.

Peterson

M. F.

Eckstein

M. P.

(2012). Looking just below the eyes is optimal across face recognition tasks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 109, E3314–E3323.

25.

Pinheiro

J. C.

Bates

D. M.

(2000). Mixed effects models in S and S-Plus. New York, NY: Springer Verlag.

26.

Rayner

(1975). The perceptual span and peripheral cues in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 65–81.

27.

Rayner

(1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372–422.

28.

Rayner

(2009). The 35th Sir Frederick Bartlett lecture: Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1457–1506.

29.

Rayner

McConkie

G. W.

Zola

(1980). Integrating information across eye movements. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 206–226.

30.

Rayner

Well

A. D.

Pollatsek

Bertera

J. H.

(1982). The availability of useful information to the right of fixation in reading. Perception and Psychophysics, 31, 537–550.

31.

Reichle

E. D.

Pollatsek

Fisher

D. L.

Rayner

(1998). Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review, 105, 125–157.

32.

Stuart

J. A.

Burian

H. M.

(1962). A study of separation difficulty: Its relationship to visual acuity in normal and amblyopic eyes. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 53, 471–477.

33.

Tanenhaus

M. K.

Spivey-Knowlton

M. J.

Eberhard

K. M.

Sedivy

J. C.

(1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268, 1632–1634.

34.

Todorov

Jordan

M. I.

(2002). Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor coordination. Nature Neuroscience, 5, 1226–1135.

35.

Vitu

O’Regan

J. K.

Mittau

(1990). Optimal landing position in reading isolated words and continuous text. Perception and Psychophysics, 47, 583–600.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.32 MB

0.48 MB

Ongoing Cognitive Processing Influences Precise Eye-Movement Targets in Reading

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material