Eye movements in reading: Models and data
By Keith Rayner, Alexander Pollatsek, Erik D. Reichle. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2003
165 citations recorded by the source corpus.
The issues the commentators have raised and which we address, include: the debate over how attention is allocated during reading; our distinction between early and late stages of lexical processing; our assumptions about saccadic programming; the determinants of skipping and refixations; and the role that higher-level linguistic processing may play in influencing eye movements during reading. In addition, we provide a discussion of model development and principles for evaluating and comparing models. Although we acknowledge that E-Z Reader is incomplete, we maintain that it provides a good framework for systematically trying to understand how the cognitive, perceptual, and motor systems influence the eyes during reading.
Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Human-Computer Interaction
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/cd220d086ecef53039378cbc9ca3db0154654704
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Developmental and Educational Psychology
- A. Pellicer‐Sánchez
- Shravan Vasishth
- Karl J. Friston
- Keith Rayner
- Titus von der Malsburg
- Stuart Webb
- Adrian Staub
- Alexander Pollatsek
In Human-Computer Interaction
Citations in the corpus
- Perceptions as Hypotheses: Saccades as Experiments (2012, background): “Moreover, models of oculomotor control in reading – such as EZ-Reader or SWIFT (Rayner, 2009) – are particularly elaborate and include contextual constraints (allowing predictions) and mechanisms linking where and when decisions.”
- INCIDENTAL L2 VOCABULARY ACQUISITION FROM AND WHILE READING (2015, background): “See Rayner ( 1997 , 1998 , 2009 ) for a comprehensive review of fi ndings in eye movements and reading research.”
- What is the scanpath signature of syntactic reanalysis (2011, background): “…is evident from two facts: (i) preview effects which indicate that processing of a word can start even before the eyes fixate it for the first time (Rayner, 1998, 2009); (ii) the spillover-effects where processing initiated at one word can continue even after the eyes move to fixate another word…”
- Eye movements and non-canonical reading: comments on. (2009, unknown): “4The points made in this section generally follow from Rayner (2007) in his keynote address at ECEM14.”
- The 35th Sir Frederick Bartlett Lecture: Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search (2009, background): “More critically, when the fixated word disappears after 50–60 ms, how long the eyes remain in place is determined by the frequency of the word that disappeared: If it is a low-frequency word, the eyes remain in place longer (Rayner et al., 2003b, 2006c).”