The influence of parafoveal typographical errors on eye movements in reading

By J. Pynte, A. Kennedy, S. Ducrot. 2004

89 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Human-Computer Interaction

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ccc35502f4d3e6d543c5487401c28d4264c4848e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Human-Computer Interaction

Citations in the corpus

Eye movements and on-line comprehension processes (2007, background): “) Interestingly, the duration of the fixation prior to a skip is inflated (Drieghe et al., 2005; Kliegl and Engbert, 2005; Pollatsek et al., 1986; Pynte et al., 2004).”
SWIFT: a dynamical model of saccade generation during reading. (2005, background): “Analogously, we can study successor effects of word n ϩ 1 on fixation durations of word n, a subset of which are called parafoveal-on-foveal effects (Kennedy, 2000a, 2000b; Kennedy & Pynte, 2004).”
Parafoveal processing in reading (2011, background): “This was demonstrated by Pynte, Kennedy, and Ducrot (2004), who conducted a gaze-contingent boundary experiment where word previews embedded in sentences could contain several different kinds of typographical errors, while the actual target words were always spelled correctly.”
E-Z Reader: A cognitive-control, serial-attention model of eye-movement behavior during reading (2006, methodology): “The model has been used to generate novel predictions (some of which have already been confirmed; e.g., the cost associated with skipping words; Kliegl & Engbert, 2005; Pollatsek et al., 1986; Pynte et al., 2004; Rayner et al., 2004) and it has inspired quite a bit of new research (some of which was”
Book Review: Eye Tracking: A Comprehensive Guide to Methods and Measures (2016, background): “For example, Pynte, Kennedy, and Ducrot (2004) showed that parafoveal typographical errors affect foveal inspection time (and subsequent saccades), even if the error is invariably corrected before the eyes land on its location.”