Deaf readers use leftward information to read more efficiently: Evidence from eye tracking

Abstract

Little is known about how information to the left of fixation impacts reading and how it may help to integrate what has been read into the context of the sentence. To better understand the role of this leftward information and how it may be beneficial during reading, we compared the sizes of the leftward span for reading-matched deaf signers (n = 32) and hearing adults (n = 40) using a gaze-contingent moving window paradigm with windows of 1, 4, 7, 10, and 13 characters to the left, as well as a no-window condition. All deaf participants were prelingually and profoundly deaf, used American Sign Language (ASL) as a primary means of communication, and were exposed to ASL before age eight. Analysis of reading rates indicated that deaf readers had a leftward span of 10 characters, compared to four characters for hearing readers, and the size of the span was positively related to reading comprehension ability for deaf but not hearing readers. These findings suggest that deaf readers may engage in continued word processing of information obtained to the left of fixation, making reading more efficient, and showing a qualitatively different reading process than hearing readers.

Keywords

Perceptual span word identification span deaf readers eye movements reading

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Balota

D. A.

Yap

M. J.

Cortese

M. J.

Hutchison

K. A.

Kessler

Loftis

Neely

J. H.

Nelson

D. L.

Simpson

G. B.

Treiman

(2007). The English Lexicon Project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445–459.

Bates

Maechler

Bolker

Walker

(2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48.

Bavelier

Brozinsky

Tomann

Mitchell

Neville

Liu

(2001). Impact of early deafness and early exposure to sign language on the cerebral organization for motion processing. Journal of Neuroscience, 21(22), 8931–8942. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.21-22-08931.2001

Bélanger

N. N.

Lee

Schotter

E. R.

(2018). Young skilled deaf readers have an enhanced perceptual span in reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(1), 291–301. https://doi.org/10.1080%2F17470218.2017.1324498

Bélanger

N. N.

Rayner

(2015). What eye movements reveal about deaf readers. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(3), 220–226. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0963721414567527

Bélanger

N. N.

Slattery

T. J.

Mayberry

R. I.

Rayner

(2012). Skilled deaf readers have an enhanced perceptual span in reading. Psychological Science, 23(7), 816–823. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0956797611435130

Bosworth

R. G.

Wright

C. E.

Dobkins

K. R.

(2019). Analysis of the visual spatiotemporal properties of American Sign Language. Vision Research, 164, 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2019.08.008

Chen

Jin

(2010). Altered spatial distribution of visual attention in near and far space after early deafness. Neuropsychologia, 48(9), 2693–2698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.05.016

Chen

Zhang

Zhou

(2006). Effects of spatial distribution of attention during inhibition of return (IOR) on flanker interference in hearing and congenitally deaf people. Brain Research, 1109(1), 117–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.06.043

10.

Choi

Lowder

M. W.

Ferreira

Henderson

J. M.

(2015). Individual differences in the perceptual span during reading: Evidence from the moving window technique. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77(7), 2463–2475. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-015-0942-1

11.

Dunn

L. M.

Markwardt

F. C.

(1989). Peabody individual achievement test-revised. American Guidance Service.

12.

Dye

M. W.

(2016). Foveal processing under concurrent peripheral load in profoundly deaf adults. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 21(2), 122–128. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/env054

13.

Dye

M. W.

Baril

D. E.

Bavelier

(2007). Which aspects of visual attention are changed by deafness? The case of the Attentional Network Test. Neuropsychologia, 45(8), 1801–1811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.12.019

14.

Dye

M. W.

Hauser

P. C.

Bavelier

(2009). Is visual selective attention in deaf individuals enhanced or deficient? The case of the useful field of view. PLOS ONE, 4(5), e5640. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0005640

15.

Emmorey

Thompson

Colvin

(2009). Eye gaze during comprehension of American Sign Language by native and beginning signers. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 14(2), 237–243. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enn037

16.

INK Co. (n.d.). Reading grade level Checker Tool. https://app.inkforall.com/reading-level-checker

17.

Kuntze

Golos

Enns

(2014). Rethinking literacy: Broadening opportunities for visual learners. Sign Language Studies, 14, 203–224. http://doi.org/10.1353/sls.2014.0002

18.

Lindstrom

M. J.

Bates

D. M.

(1990). Nonlinear mixed effects models for repeated measures data. Biometrics, 46, 673–687. https://doi.org/10.2307/2532087

19.

Liu

Z. F.

Chen

C. Y.

Tong

Y. Q.

(2021). Deafness enhances perceptual span size in Chinese reading: Evidence from a gaze-contingent moving-window paradigm. Psych Journal, 10(4), 508–520. https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.442

20.

Lore

Song

(1991). Central and peripheral visual processing in hearing and nonhearing individuals. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 29(5), 437–440. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03333964

21.

(2015). Syntactic complexity in college-level English writing: Differences among writers with diverse L1 backgrounds. Journal of Second Language Writing, 29, 16–27.

22.

McConkie

G. W.

Rayner

(1975). The span of the effective stimulus during a fixation in reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 17, 578–586. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203972

23.

McConkie

G. W.

Rayner

(1976). Asymmetry of the perceptual span in reading. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 8(5), 365–368. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03335168

24.

Meixner

J. M.

Nixon

J. S.

Laubrock

(2022). The perceptual span is dynamically adjusted in response to foveal load by beginning readers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 151(6), 1219–1232. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001140

25.

Neville

H. J.

Lawson

(1987). Attention to central and peripheral visual space in a movement detection task. III. Separate effects of auditory deprivation and acquisition of a visual language. Brain Research, 405(2), 284–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-8993(87)90297-6

26.

Parasnis

Samar

V. J.

(1985). Parafoveal attention in congenitally deaf and hearing young adults. Brain and Cognition, 4(3), 313–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2626(85)90024-7

27.

Plummer

Perea

Rayner

(2015). The influence of contextual diversity on eye movements in reading [Data Set]. Keith Rayner Eye Movements in Reading Data Collection. UC San Diego Library Digital Collections. http://doi.org/10.6075/J0RF5RZ9

28.

Proksch

Bavelier

(2002). Changes in the spatial distribution of visual attention after early deafness. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14(5), 687–701. https://doi.org/10.1162/08989290260138591

29.

R Core Team. (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/

30.

Rayner

(1986). Eye movements and the perceptual span in beginning and skilled readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 41(2), 211–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(86)90037-8

31.

Rayner

(1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372–422. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372

32.

Rayner

(2014). The gaze-contingent moving window in reading: Development and review. Visual Cognition, 22(3–4), 242–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2013.879084

33.

Rayner

Reichle

E. D.

Stroud

M. J.

Williams

C. C.

Pollatsek

(2006). The effect of word frequency, word predictability, and font difficulty on the eye movements of young and older readers. Psychology and Aging, 21(3), 448. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.21.3.448

34.

Rayner

Slattery

T. J.

Bélanger

N. N.

(2010). Eye movements, the perceptual span, and reading speed. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17(6), 834–839. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.17.6.834

35.

Rayner

Well

A. D.

Pollatsek

Bertera

J. H.

(1982). The availability of useful information to the right of fixation in reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 31, 537–550. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03204186

36.

Schotter

E. R.

Bicknell

Howard

Levy

Rayner

(2015). Task effects reveal cognitive flexibility responding to frequency and predictability: Evidence from eye movements in reading and proofreading [Data Set]. Keith Rayner Eye Movements in Reading Data Collection. UC San Diego Library Digital Collections. http://doi.org/10.6075/J0X63JTD

37.

Seymour

J. L.

Low

K. A.

Maclin

E. L.

Chiarelli

A. M.

Mathewson

K. E.

Fabiani

Dye

M. W.

(2017). Reorganization of neural systems mediating peripheral visual selective attention in the deaf: An optical imaging study. Hearing Research, 343, 162–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2016.09.007

38.

Sladen

D. P.

Tharpe

A. M.

Ashmead

D. H.

Grantham

D. W.

Chun

M. M.

(2005). Visual attention in deaf and normal hearing adults. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48(6), 1529–1537. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2005/106)

39.

Sperlich

Meixner

Laubrock

(2016). Development of the perceptual span in reading: A longitudinal study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 146, 181–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2016.02.007

40.

Sperlich

Schad

D. J.

Laubrock

(2015). When preview information starts to matter: Development of the perceptual span in German beginning readers. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27(5), 511–530. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2014.993990

41.

Stevens

Neville

(2006). Neuroplasticity as a double-edged sword: Deaf enhancements and dyslexic deficits in motion processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(5), 701–714. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2006.18.5.701

42.

Stoll

Dye

M. W. G.

(2019). Sign language experience redistributes attentional resources to the inferior visual field. Cognition, 191, 103957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.04.026

43.

Traxler

Banh

Craft

Winsler

Brothers

Hoversten

Piñar

Corina

(2021). Word skipping in deaf and hearing bilinguals: Cognitive control over eye movements remains with increased perceptual span. Applied Psycholinguistics, 42(3), 601–630. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716420000740

44.

Underwood

N. R.

McConkie

G. W.

(1985). Perceptual span for letter distinctions during reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 153–162. https://doi.org/10.2307/747752

45.

Veldre

Andrews

(2014). Lexical quality and eye movements: Individual differences in the perceptual span of skilled adult readers. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 703–727. http://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.826258

46.

Veldre

Wong

Andrews

(2021). Reading proficiency predicts the extent of the right, but not left, perceptual span in older readers. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 83, 18–26. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-020-02185-x

47.

Westfall

(2016). PANGEA: Power analysis for general ANOVA designs (working paper).

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

0.41 MB