Parafoveal-on-Foveal Effects in Reading and Word Recognition
In this Chapter, I want to raise some questions concerning the ‘attention-switching’ model of eye movement control in reading first proposed by Morrison (1984). A basic assumption of this model is that after a criterion level of processing has been reached on a given word n (for example, lexical access), attention will shift discretely to the next word, n+1, while the eyes remain fixating n. At the same time as this attentional shift takes place, an eye movement is programmed towards word n+1. Thus, for a period of time, a reader may be fixating word n, preparing to make a saccade, and processing word n+1. If the processing of word n+1 is completed before the saccade takes place, a further switch of attention (to word n+2) may occur and a second saccade will be programmed, in parallel with the first. The way the oculomotor system deals with simultaneous programming of more than one saccade depends on their relative timing (Becker and Jurgens 1979). If the trigger commands are widely separated in time, both saccades may be executed, but the duration of the fixation following the first may be drastically reduced. If the delay is short, only the second saccade will be initiated. Between these limits, a ‘compromise’ saccade may be launched, to an intermediate target position.
KeywordsTarget Word Word Recognition Word Frequency Fixation Duration Inspection Time
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Balota D A (1990) The role of meaning in word recognition. In: Balota D A, Flores d’Arcais G B, Rayner K (eds) Comprehension processes in reading. Erlbaum, Hillsdale N.J., pp 9–32Google Scholar
- CELEX German database (1995) Release D25. Nijmegen Centre for Lexical InformationGoogle Scholar
- Kennedy A (1998) The influence of parafoveal words on foveal inspection time: evidence for a processing tradeoff. In: Underwood G (ed) Eye guidance in reading, driving and scene perception. Oxford, Elsevier (in press)Google Scholar
- Murray W S (1982) Sentence matching: The influence of meaning and structure. Unpublished PhD Thesis Monash University, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
- O’Regan J K (1989) Visual acuity, lexical structure and eye movements in word recognition. In: Elsendoorn B, Bouma H (eds) Working models of human perception. London, Academic Press, pp 261–292Google Scholar
- O’Regan J K (1990) Eye movements and reading. In: Kowler E (ed.) Eye movements and their role in visual and cognitive processes. Amsterdam, Elsevier, pp 395–453Google Scholar
- O’Regan J K, Levy-Schoen A (1987) Eye movement strategy and tactics in word-recognition and reading. In: Coltheart M (ed) Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading. Hillsdale, Erlbaum, pp 363–383Google Scholar
- Radach R (1996) Blickbewegungen beim Lesen: Psychologische Aspekte der Determination von Fixationsposi-tionen (Eye movements in reading). Münster, WaxmannGoogle Scholar
- Rayner K, Pollatsek A (1989) The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-HallGoogle Scholar
- Rayner K, Sereno S C, Raney G E (1996) Eye movement control in reading: A comparison of two types of models. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 22: 1–13Google Scholar
- Schroyens W, Vitu F, Brysbaert M, d’Ydewalle G (1998) Visual attention and eye movement control during reading: The case of parafoveal processing. In: Underwood G (ed) Eye guidance in reading, driving and scene perception. Oxford, Elsevier (in press)Google Scholar
- Vitu F, O’Regan J K (1995) A challenge to current theories of eye movements in reading. In: Findlay J M, Walker R, Kentridge R W (eds) Eye movement research: mechanisms, processes and applications. Amsterdam, North-Holland, pp 382–392Google Scholar