Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

People frequently read in sub-optimal conditions (Charness & Dijkstra, 1999). When text is difficult to perceive, readers can rely on sentential context as a compensatory strategy. Specifically, readers can develop expectations about which words will occur in a text based on the context in which words occur. The purpose of this study was to examine age differences in the use of contextual utilization, by comparing words that were highly predictable from their sentence context to words that were less predictable from their sentence context. Text was presented in three different levels of text/background contrast (high, medium, low) to explore the effects of contrast reduction. Eye tracking was used to measure fixation times to target words. Readers, particularly older adults, fixated low-predictability words longer than high-predictability words. Contrast reduction did not significantly influence reading times for either group, suggesting that readers are tolerant of some forms of stimulus quality degradation.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Charness

Dijkstra

(1999). Age, luminance, and print legibility in homes, offices, and public places. Human Factors, 41(2), 173–193.

Daneman

Carpenter

P. A.

(1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Ability, 19, 450–466.

Hartley

J. T.

(1993). Aging and prose memory: Tests of the resource-deficit hypothesis. Psychology and Aging, 5(4), 538–551.

Kemper

Kemtes

(2000). Aging and message production and comprehension. In Park

D. C.

(Ed.), Cognitive aging: A primer (pp. 197–213). Philadelphia, PA, US: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis.

See

Kwong S. T.

Ryan

E. B.

(1995). Cognitive mediation of adult age differences in language performance. Psychology and Aging, 10, 458–468.

Lankford

(2001). Gaze Tracker. Version 2000 Beta 2. VA: ERICA Inc.

Light

L. L.

(1996). Memory and aging. In Bjork

E. L.

(Ed.), Memory (pp. 443–490). San Diego, CA: Academic Press Inc.

Rayner

Well

A. D.

(1996). Effects of contextual constraint on eye movements in reading: A further examination. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 3, 504–509.

Schwanenflugel

P. J.

(1986). Completion norms for final words of sentences using a multiple production measure. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 18(4), 363–371.

10.

Schneider

B. A.

Fuller

Pichora M. K.

(2000). Implications of perceptual deterioration for cognitive aging research. In Craik

F. I. M.

Salthouse

T. A.

(Eds.), The handbook of aging and cognition (2nd ed., pp. 155–219). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc Publishers.

11.

Shipley

W. C.

(1986). Shipley Institute of Living Scale. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.

12.

Speranza

Daneman

Schneider

B. A.

(2000). How aging affects the reading of words in noisy backgrounds. Psychology and Aging, 15(2), 253–258.

13.

Stanovich

K. E.

West

R. F.

(1979). Mechanisms of sentence context effects in reading: Automatic activation and conscious attention. Memory & Cognition, 7, 77–85.

14.

VISTECH (1997). Vision Contrast Test System. Dayton: VISTECH Consultants, Inc.

15.

Wingfield

Stine Morrow

E. A. L.

(2000). Language and speech. In Craik

F. I. M.

(Ed.), The handbook of aging and cognition (pp. 359–416). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc Publishers.

Effects of Reduced Contrast on Young and Older Adults' Utilization of Context during Reading

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References