26 ms
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 35

26 ms PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 128 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

26 ms. 9 ms. Low High Predictability. Low High Predictability. Low High Predictability. 4-6. 1-3. 7-9. Launch Distance from Target (# letters). Low High Predictability. Low High Predictability. Low High Predictability. 4-6. 1-3. 7-9.

Download Presentation

26 ms

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


26 ms

26 ms

9 ms


26 ms

Low High

Predictability

Low High

Predictability

Low High

Predictability

4-6

1-3

7-9

Launch Distance from Target (# letters)


26 ms

Low High

Predictability

Low High

Predictability

Low High

Predictability

4-6

1-3

7-9

Launch Distance from Target (# letters)


26 ms

Conclusions

  • Apparent additive effect of Freq & Pred in reading is comprised of opposing interactive effects.

  • Possible explanations:

    • Frequency first

    • Floors and ceilings

  • Launch site important


26 ms

Conclusions

  • Possible explanations


26 ms

Low High

Predictability

Low High

Predictability

Low High

Predictability

4-6

1-3

7-9

Launch Distance from Target (# letters)


26 ms

26 ms

9 ms


26 ms

Launch Distance

1-3

…grabbed a bottle of water from a…

4-6

7-9

Target-1 fixation

frequencyn.s.n.s.marg.

predictabilityn.s.n.s.**

Target fixation

frequency

predictability

process current word(s)

Identify fixation target meaning

process current word(s)

Identify fixation target meaning

process current word(s)

Identify fixation target form


26 ms

Low High

Predictability

Low High

Predictability

Low High

Predictability

4-6

1-3

7-9

Launch Distance from Target (# letters)


26 ms

Low High

Predictability

Low High

Predictability

Low High

Predictability

4-6

1-3

7-9

Launch Distance from Target (# letters)


26 ms

Low High

Predictability

Low High

Predictability

Low High

Predictability

4-6

1-3

7-9

Launch Distance from Target (# letters)


26 ms

Effects Before the Target?

…grabbed a bottle of water from a…

location of current,

pre-target fixation

  • “Parafoveal-on-foveal” effects (oh no!):

    • When the ease or difficulty in processing a parafoveal target initially manifests itself on the current, pre-target fixation.


26 ms

4 ms

(marg.)

6 ms

(p<.01)


26 ms

Parafoveal Processing InfluencesWord Frequency & Predictability Effectson Eye Movements during Reading

Christopher Sébastien Patrick Sara

Hand Miellet O’Donnell Sereno

Glasgow

Language

Processing

University of Glasgow

(est. 1451)


26 ms

Glasgow

University

LanguageProcessing

GULP

Parafoveal Processing InfluencesWord Frequency & Predictability Effects on Eye Movementsduring Reading

University of Glasgow

(est. 1451)


26 ms

Glasgow

University

LanguageProcessing

GULP

Parafoveal Processing InfluencesWord Frequency & Predictability Effectson Eye Movements during Reading

Christopher Sébastien Patrick Sara

Hand Miellet O’Donnell Sereno

University of Glasgow

(est. 1451)


26 ms

Parafoveal Processing InfluencesWord Frequency & Predictability Effectson Eye Movements during Reading

Christopher Sébastien Patrick Sara

Hand Miellet O’Donnell Sereno

Glasgow

Language

Processing

University of Glasgow

(est. 1451)


Method

WOW!

Method

  • Participants: 64

    • native English speaking; normal vision; not dyslexic

    • mean age = 22.2 (range: 18-41); #F=47, #M=17

  • Apparatus: Dual-Purkinje Eyetracker (Gen 5.5)

  • Materials & Design:

    Conditions: Frequency (HF,LF) x Predictability (HP,LP)

    Targets: HF & LF targets matched pair-wise on word length (mean=5.84 letters; range: 5-8 letters)


Materials design

Materials & Design

  • Participants: 64

  • Apparatus: Dual-Purkinje Eyetracker (Gen 5.5.)

  • Materials & Design:

    Conditions: Frequency (HF,LF) x Predictability (HP,LP)

    Targets: HF & LF targets matched pairwise on word length (5-8 letters; avg = xx)

=== HF === === LF ===

HPLPHPLP

Frequency (BNC, per million) 145 145 4 4

Predictability (1-7) 6.19 4.07 6.11 3.69

Cloze probability 0.57 0.02 0.50 0.01


26 ms

Freq X Pred: Eye Movements

Altarriba, Kroll, Sholl, & Rayner (1996)

Lavinge, Vitu, & d’Ydewalle (2000)

Rayner, Binder, Ashby, & Pollatsek (2001)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Rayner, Ashby, Pollatsek, & Reichle (2004)

Miellet, Sparrow, & Sereno (in press)

Inhoff (1984)

conducted

en français


26 ms

Freq X Pred: Eye Movements

Altarriba, Kroll, Sholl, & Rayner (1996)

Lavinge, Vitu, & d’Ydewalle (2000)

Rayner, Binder, Ashby, & Pollatsek (2001)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Rayner, Ashby, Pollatsek, & Reichle (2004)

Miellet, Sparrow, & Sereno (in press)

Inhoff (1984)

conducted

in French


26 ms

High Low

Predictable

High Low

Predictable

High Low

Predictable

4-6

1-3

7-9

Launch Distance from Target (# letters)


26 ms

Rayner et al. (2004)

LimitationsRemedies

Items per condition:

8

Length of context (# pre-target words):

7.7 words

Target embedded in:

single sentence

22

15.5

2nd of 2

sentences


26 ms

Freq X Pred: Eye Movements

Altarriba, Kroll, Sholl, & Rayner (1996)

Lavinge, Vitu, & d’Ydewalle (2000)

Rayner, Binder, Ashby, & Pollatsek (2001)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Rayner, Ashby, Pollatsek, & Reichle (2004)

Miellet, Sparrow, & Sereno (in press)

Inhoff (1984)


Method1

WOW!

HF LF

HPLPHPLP

Frequency (BNC, per million) 145 145 4 4

Predictability (1-7) 6.19 4.07 6.11 3.69

Cloze probability 0.57 0.02 0.50 0.01

Method

  • Participants: 64 (mean age = 22; #F=47)

  • Apparatus: Dual-Purkinje Eyetracker (Gen 5.5)

  • Materials & Design:

    Frequency (HF,LF) x Predictability (HP,LP)

    HF & LF targets matched pair-wise on word length (mean = 5.84 letters; range: 5-8 letters)


Method2

Method

  • Materials & Design:

    Frequency (HF,LF) x Predictability (HP,LP)

    HF & LF targets matched pair-wise on word length (mean = 5.84 letters; range: 5-8 letters)

HF LF

HPLPHPLP

Frequency (BNC, per million) 145 145 4 4

Predictability (1-7) 6.19 4.07 6.11 3.69

Cloze probability .57 .02 .50 .01

# of items 22 22 22 22


Method3

HF LF

HPLPHPLP

Frequency (BNC, per million) 145 145 4 4

Predictability (1-7) 6.19 4.07 6.11 3.69

Cloze probability .57 .02 .50 .01

# of items 22 22 22 22

Method

  • Materials & Design:

    Frequency (HF,LF) x Predictability (HP,LP)

    HF & LF targets matched pair-wise on word length (mean = 5.84 letters; range: 5-8 letters)


Results fixation time measures

Results: Fixation Time Measures

  • Early

    • First fixation duration (FFD)

    • Single fixation duration (SFD)

    • Gaze duration (GD)

    • Probability of skipping (skip) = [1 – prob(fixation)]

  • Later

    • Next forward-going fixation (next)

    • Total Fixation Time (TT)

    • # regressions into target, # regressions out of target

1 fix2+ fixskipreject

63% 12%21% 4%


26 ms

Parafoveal Pre-processing

In reading, words are processed parafoveally

Before they are foveated.

Reading involves foveal processing and

Parafoveal processing before the


26 ms

time

T

I

M

E


26 ms

McConkie’s N ?

  • In fact, the EM condition most resembling RT presentation (i.e., no parafoveal preview), only shows a frequency effect in early measures.

  • However, different patterns emerge when fixation time is


26 ms

Low High

Predictability

Low High

Predictability

Low High

Predictability

4-6

1-3

7-9

Launch Distance from Target (# letters)


  • Login