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

The data on this page was last updated at 15:24 on May 5, 2021.