Tracking the Mind During Reading Via Eye Movements: Comments on Kliegl, Nuthmann, and Engbert (2006)
Authors: Rayner, K., Pollatsek, A., Drieghe, D., Slattery, T.J. and Reichle, E.D.
Journal: Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
Volume: 136
Issue: 3
Pages: 520-529
ISSN: 0096-3445
DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.136.3.520
Abstract:R. Kliegl, A. Nuthmann, and R. Engbert (2006) reported an impressive set of data analyses dealing with the influence of the prior, present, and next word on the duration of the current eye fixation during reading. They argued that outcomes of their regression analyses indicate that lexical processing is distributed across a number of words during reading. The authors of this comment question their conclusions and address 4 different issues: (a) whether there is evidence for distributed lexical processing, (b) whether so-called parafoveal-on-foveal effects are widespread, (c) the role of correlational analyses in reading research, and (d) problems in their analyses because they use only cases in which words are fixated exactly once. © 2007 American Psychological Association.
Source: Scopus
Tracking the mind during reading via eye movements: comments on Kliegl, Nuthmann, and Engbert (2006).
Authors: Rayner, K., Pollatsek, A., Drieghe, D., Slattery, T.J. and Reichle, E.D.
Journal: J Exp Psychol Gen
Volume: 136
Issue: 3
Pages: 520-529
ISSN: 0096-3445
DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.136.3.520
Abstract:R. Kliegl, A. Nuthmann, and R. Engbert reported an impressive set of data analyses dealing with the influence of the prior, present, and next word on the duration of the current eye fixation during reading. They argued that outcomes of their regression analyses indicate that lexical processing is distributed across a number of words during reading. The authors of this comment question their conclusions and address 4 different issues: (a) whether there is evidence for distributed lexical processing, (b) whether so-called parafoveal-on-foveal effects are widespread, (c) the role of correlational analyses in reading research, and (d) problems in their analyses because they use only cases in which words are fixated exactly once.
Source: PubMed
Tracking the mind during reading via eye movements: Comments on Kliegl, Nuthmann, and Engbert (2006)
Authors: Rayner, K., Pollatsek, A., Drieghe, D., Slattery, T.J. and Reichle, E.D.
Journal: JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL
Volume: 136
Issue: 3
Pages: 520-529
eISSN: 1939-2222
ISSN: 0096-3445
DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.136.3.520
Source: Web of Science (Lite)
Tracking the mind during reading via eye movements: Comments on Kliegl, Nuthmann, and Engbert (2006).
Authors: Rayner, K., Pollatsek, A., Drieghe, D., Slattery, T.J. and Reichle, E.D.
Publisher: American Psychological Association
Source: Manual
Tracking the mind during reading via eye movements: comments on Kliegl, Nuthmann, and Engbert (2006).
Authors: Rayner, K., Pollatsek, A., Drieghe, D., Slattery, T.J. and Reichle, E.D.
Journal: Journal of experimental psychology. General
Volume: 136
Issue: 3
Pages: 520-529
eISSN: 1939-2222
ISSN: 0096-3445
DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.136.3.520
Abstract:R. Kliegl, A. Nuthmann, and R. Engbert reported an impressive set of data analyses dealing with the influence of the prior, present, and next word on the duration of the current eye fixation during reading. They argued that outcomes of their regression analyses indicate that lexical processing is distributed across a number of words during reading. The authors of this comment question their conclusions and address 4 different issues: (a) whether there is evidence for distributed lexical processing, (b) whether so-called parafoveal-on-foveal effects are widespread, (c) the role of correlational analyses in reading research, and (d) problems in their analyses because they use only cases in which words are fixated exactly once.
Source: Europe PubMed Central