Display options
Cite
AlJassmi MA, Warrington KL, McGowan VA, et al. Effects of word predictability on eye movements during Arabic reading. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2021;doi: 10.3758/s13414-021-02375-1.
AlJassmi, M. A., Warrington, K. L., McGowan, V. A., White, S. J., & Paterson, K. B. (2021). Effects of word predictability on eye movements during Arabic reading. Attention, perception & psychophysics, . https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-021-02375-1
AlJassmi, Maryam A, et al. "Effects of word predictability on eye movements during Arabic reading." Attention, perception & psychophysics vol. (2021). doi: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-021-02375-1
AlJassmi MA, Warrington KL, McGowan VA, White SJ, Paterson KB. Effects of word predictability on eye movements during Arabic reading. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2021 Oct 10; doi: 10.3758/s13414-021-02375-1. Epub 2021 Oct 10. PMID: 34632557.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Atten Percept Psychophys. 2021 Oct 10; doi: 10.3758/s13414-021-02375-1. Epub 2021 Oct 10.

Effects of word predictability on eye movements during Arabic reading.

Attention, perception & psychophysics

Maryam A AlJassmi, Kayleigh L Warrington, Victoria A McGowan, Sarah J White, Kevin B Paterson

Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Zayed University, Dubai, UAE. [email protected].
  2. Department of Neuroscience, Psychology and Behaviour, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. [email protected].
  3. Department of Neuroscience, Psychology and Behaviour, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
  4. Department of Psychology, Nottingham Trent University, Trent, UK.

PMID: 34632557 DOI: 10.3758/s13414-021-02375-1

Abstract

Contextual predictability influences both the probability and duration of eye fixations on words when reading Latinate alphabetic scripts like English and German. However, it is unknown whether word predictability influences eye movements in reading similarly for Semitic languages like Arabic, which are alphabetic languages with very different visual and linguistic characteristics. Such knowledge is nevertheless important for establishing the generality of mechanisms of eye-movement control across different alphabetic writing systems. Accordingly, we investigated word predictability effects in Arabic in two eye-movement experiments. Both produced shorter fixation times for words with high compared to low predictability, consistent with previous findings. Predictability did not influence skipping probabilities for (four- to eight-letter) words of varying length and morphological complexity (Experiment 1). However, it did for short (three- to four-letter) words with simpler structures (Experiment 2). We suggest that word-skipping is reduced, and affected less by contextual predictability, in Arabic compared to Latinate alphabetic reading, because of specific orthographic and morphological characteristics of the Arabic script.

© 2021. Crown.

Keywords: Arabic; Eye movements during reading; Word predictability; Word-skipping

References

  1. AlJassmi, M. A., Hermena, E. W., & Paterson, K. B. (2021). Eye movements in Arabic reading. In D. Ntelitheos and T. Leung (Eds.), Experimental Arabic Linguistics, 10, 85-108. https://doi.org/10.1075/sal.10.03alj - PubMed
  2. Altarriba, J., Kroll, J. F., Sholl, A., & Rayner, K. (1996). The influence of lexical and conceptual constraints on reading mixed-language sentences: Evidence from eye fixations and naming times. Memory & Cognition, 24, 477-492. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03200936 - PubMed
  3. Balota, D. A., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1985). The interaction of contextual constraints and parafoveal visual information in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 364-390. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(85)90013-1 - PubMed
  4. Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001 - PubMed
  5. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48. - PubMed
  6. Boudelaa, S. (2013). Psycholinguistics. In J. Owens (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of Arabic linguistics (pp. 369–391). Oxford University Press. - PubMed
  7. Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2010). Aralex: A lexical database for Modern Standard Arabic. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 481-487. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.2.481 - PubMed
  8. Brysbaert, M., & Stevens, M. (2018). Power Analysis and Effect Size in Mixed Effects Models: A Tutorial. Journal of Cognition, 1, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.10 - PubMed
  9. Brysbaert, M., Drieghe, D., & Vitu, F. (2005). Word skipping: Implications for theories of eye movement control in reading. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Cognitive processes in eye guidance (pp. 53–78). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Pres - PubMed
  10. Chang, M., Hao, L., Zhao, S., Li, L., Paterson, K. B., & Wang, J. (2020a). Flexible parafoveal encoding of character order supports word predictability effects in Chinese reading: Evidence from eye movements. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-020-02050-x - PubMed
  11. Chang, M., Zhang, K., Hao, L., Zhao, S., McGowan, V. A., Warrington, K. L., ... Gunn, S. C. (2020b). Word predictability depends on parafoveal preview validity in Chinese reading. Visual Cognition, 28, 33-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2020.1714825 - PubMed
  12. Choi, W., Lowder, M. W., Ferreira, F., Swaab, T. Y., & Henderson, J. M. (2017). Effects of word predictability and preview lexicality on eye movements during reading: A comparison between young and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 32, 232–242. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000160 - PubMed
  13. Dank, M., Deutsch, A., & Bock, K. (2015). Resolving conflicts in natural and grammatical gender agreement: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 44, 435-467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-014-9291-9 - PubMed
  14. Deutsch, A. (1998). Subject-predicate agreement in Hebrew: Interrelations with semantic processes. Language & Cognitive Processes, 13, 575-597. https://doi.org/10.1080/016909698386447 - PubMed
  15. Deutsch, A., & Bentin, S. (2001). Syntactic and semantic factors in processing gender agreement in Hebrew: Evidence from ERPs and eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 200-224. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2768 - PubMed
  16. Deutsch, A., & Rayner, K. (1999). Initial fixation location effects in reading Hebrew words. Language & Cognitive Processes, 14, 393-421. https://doi.org/10.1080/016909699386284 - PubMed
  17. Deutsch, A., Frost, R., & Forster, K. (1998). Verbs and nouns are organized and accessed differently in the mental lexicon: Evidence from Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1238-1255. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.24.5.1238 - PubMed
  18. Deutsch, A., Frost, R., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2000). Early morphological effects in word recognition in Hebrew: Evidence from parafoveal preview benefit. Language & Cognitive Processes, 15, 487-506. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960050119670 - PubMed
  19. Deutsch, A., Frost, R., Pelleg, S., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2003). Early morphological effects in reading: Evidence from parafoveal preview benefit in Hebrew. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 415-422. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196500 - PubMed
  20. Deutsch, A., Frost, R., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2005). Morphological parafoveal preview benefit effects in reading: Evidence from Hebrew. Language & Cognitive Processes, 20, 341–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960444000115 - PubMed
  21. Deutsch, A., Velan, H., & Michaly, T. (2018). Decomposition in a non-concatenated morphological structure involves more than just the roots: Evidence from fast priming. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 85-92. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2016.1250788 - PubMed
  22. Deutsch, A., Velan, H., Merzbach, Y., & Michaly, T. (2021). The dependence of root extraction in a non-concatenated morphology on the word-specific orthographic context. Journal of Memory and Language, 116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2020.104182 - PubMed
  23. Ehrlich, S. F., & Rayner, K. (1981). Contextual effects on word perception and eye movements during reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 641-655. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90220-6 - PubMed
  24. Engbert, R., Nuthmann, A., Richter, E. M., & Kliegl, R. (2005). SWIFT: A dynamical model of saccade generation during reading. Psychological Review, 112, 777–813. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.777 - PubMed
  25. Eviatar, Z., Ibrahim, R., & Ganayim, D. (2004). Orthography and the Hemispheres: Visual and Linguistic Aspects of Letter Processing. Neuropsychology, 18, 174-184. https://doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.18.1.174 - PubMed
  26. Farid, M., & Grainger, J. (1996). How initial fixation position influences visual word recognition: A comparison of French and Arabic. Brain and Language, 53, 351-368. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1996.0053 - PubMed
  27. Fitzsimmons, G., & Drieghe, D. (2011). The influence of number of syllables on word skipping during reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 736-741. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0105-x - PubMed
  28. Frisson, S., Harvey, D. R., & Staub, A. (2017). No prediction error cost in reading: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 95, 200-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.04.007 - PubMed
  29. Gollan, T. H., Slattery, T. J., Goldenberg, D., Van Assche, E., Duyck, W., & Rayner, K. (2011). Frequency drives lexical access in reading but not in speaking: The frequency-lag hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 186-209. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022256 - PubMed
  30. Green, P., & MacLeod, C. J. (2016). SIMR: An R package for power analysis of generalized linear mixed models by simulation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 7, 493-498. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12504 - PubMed
  31. Hand, C. J., Miellet, S., O’Donnell, P. J., & Sereno, S. C. (2010). The frequency-predictability interaction in reading: It depends where you’re coming from. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 1294–1313. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020363 - PubMed
  32. Hand, C. J., O’Donnell, P. J., & Sereno, S. C. (2012). Word-initial letters influence fixation durations during fluent reading. Frontiers in Psychology: Language Sciences, 3, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00085 - PubMed
  33. Henderson, J. M., & Ferreira, F. (1990). Effects of foveal processing difficulty on the perceptual span in reading: Implications for attention and eye movement control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 417–429. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.16.3.417 - PubMed
  34. Hermena, E. W., & Reichle, E. D. (2020). Insights from the study of Arabic reading. Lang & Ling Compass, 14, e12400. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12400 - PubMed
  35. Hermena, E. W., Drieghe, D., Hellmuth, S., & Liversedge, S. P. (2015). Processing of Arabic Diacritical Marks: Phonological–Syntactic Disambiguation of Homographic Verbs and Visual Crowding Effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41, 494-507. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000032 - PubMed
  36. Hermena, E. W., Liversedge, S. P., & Drieghe, D. (2016). Parafoveal Processing of Arabic Diacritical Marks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42, 2021-2038. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000294 - PubMed
  37. Hermena, E. W., Liversedge, S. P., & Drieghe, D. (2017). The influence of a word’s number of letters, spatial extent, and initial bigram characteristics on eye movement control during reading: Evidence from Arabic. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43, 451-471. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000319 - PubMed
  38. Hermena, E. W., Liversedge, S. P., Bouamama, S., & Drieghe, D. (2019). Orthographic and root frequency effects in Arabic: Evidence from eye movements and lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45, 934-954. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000626 - PubMed
  39. Hermena, E. W., Juma, E. J., & AlJassmi, M. (2021). Parafoveal processing of orthographic, morphological, and semantic information during reading Arabic: A boundary paradigm investigation. PLoS One, 16, e0254745. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254745 - PubMed
  40. Inhoff, A.W., & Rayner, K. (1986). Parafoveal word processing during eye fixations in reading: Effects of word frequency. Perception & Psychophysics, 40, 431-439. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208203 - PubMed
  41. Jordan, T. R., & Paterson, K. B. (2009). Re-evaluating split-fovea processing in word recognition: A critical assessment of recent research. Neuropsychologia, 47, 2341-2353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.07.020 - PubMed
  42. Jordan, T. R., Almabruk, A. A., Gadalla, E. A., McGowan, V. A., White, S. J., Abedipour, L., & Paterson, K. B. (2014). Reading direction and the central perceptual span: Evidence from Arabic and English. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 505-511. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0510-4 - PubMed
  43. Joseph, H. S., Liversedge, S. P., Blythe, H. I., White, S. J., & Rayner, K. (2009). Word length and landing position effects during reading in children and adults. Vision Research, 49, 2078-2086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2009.05.015 - PubMed
  44. Juhasz, B. J., White, S. J., Liversedge, S. P., & Rayner, K. (2008). Eye movements and the use of parafoveal word length information in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1560–1579. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012319 - PubMed
  45. Kliegl, R., Grabner, E., Rolfs, M., & Engbert, R. (2004). Length, frequency, and predictability effects of words on eye movements in reading. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16, 262-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440340000213 - PubMed
  46. Kuperman, V., & Deutsch, A. (2020). Morphological and visual cues in compound word reading: Eye-tracking evidence from Hebrew. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021820940297 - PubMed
  47. Liversedge, S. P., & Findlay, J. M. (2000). Saccadic eye movements and cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 6-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1364-6613(99)01418-7 - PubMed
  48. Miellet, S., Sparrow, L., & Sereno, S. C. (2007). Word frequency and predictability effects in reading French: An evaluation of the EZ Reader model. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 762-769. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196834 - PubMed
  49. Nazir, T. A., Ben-Boutayab, N., Decoppet, N., Deutsch, A., & Frost, R. (2004). Reading habits, perceptual learning, and recognition of printed words. Brain and Language, 88, 294-311. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00168-8 - PubMed
  50. Pagán, A., Blythe, H. I., & Liversedge, S. P. (2016). Parafoveal preprocessing of word initial trigrams during reading in adults and children. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42, 411-432. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000175 - PubMed
  51. Parker, A. J., Kirkby, J. A., & Slattery, T. J. (2017). Predictability effects during reading in the absence of parafoveal preview, Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 29, 902-911. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2017.1340303 - PubMed
  52. Paterson, K. B., McGowan, V. A., & Jordan, T. R. (2013a). Aging and the control of binocular eyemovements during reading. Psychology and Aging, 28, 789–795. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033328 - PubMed
  53. Paterson, K. B., McGowan, V. A., & Jordan, T. R. (2013b). Filtered text reveals adult age differences in reading: Evidence from eye movements. Psychology and Aging, 28, 352–364. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030350 - PubMed
  54. Paterson, K. B., Almabruk, A. A., McGowan, V. A., White, S. J., & Jordan, T. R. (2015). Effects of word length on eye movement control: The evidence from Arabic. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 1443-1450. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0809-4 - PubMed
  55. Payne, B. R., Stites, M. C., & Federmeier, K. D. (2016). Out of the corner of my eye: Foveal semantic load modulates parafoveal processing in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42, 1839-1857. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000253 - PubMed
  56. Perea, M., Abu Mallouh, R., Mohammed, A., Khalifa, B., & Carreiras, M. (2016). Do diacritical marks play a role at the early stages of word recognition in Arabic? Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1255. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01255 - PubMed
  57. R Core Team (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. - PubMed
  58. Ratcliffe, R. R. (2013). Morphology. In J. Owens (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Arabic Linguistics (pp. 71–91). Oxford University Press. - PubMed
  59. Rayner, K. (1975). Parafoveal identification during a fixation in reading. Acta Psychologica, 39, 271-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(75)90011-6 - PubMed
  60. Rayner K. (1979). Eye guidance in reading: fixation locations within words. Perception, 8, 21-30. https://doi.org/10.1068/p080021 - PubMed
  61. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372 - PubMed
  62. Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1457-1506. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210902816461 - PubMed
  63. Rayner, K., & McConkie, G. W. (1976). What guides a reader's eye movements? Vision Research, 16, 829-837. https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(76)90143-7 - PubMed
  64. Rayner, K., & Well, A. D. (1996). Effects of contextual constraint on eye movements in reading: A further examination. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 504-509. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03214555 - PubMed
  65. Rayner, K., Sereno, S. C., & Raney, G. E. (1996). Eye movement control in reading: a comparison of two types of models. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 22, 1188-1200. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.22.5.1188 - PubMed
  66. Rayner, K., Warren, T., Juhasz, B. J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2004). The effect of plausibility on eye movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 1290–1301. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.6.1290 - PubMed
  67. Rayner, K., Li, X., Juhasz, B. J., & Yan, G. (2005). The effect of word predictability on the eye movements of Chinese readers. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 1089-1093. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206448 - PubMed
  68. Rayner, K., Slattery, T., Drieghe, D., & Liversedge, S. (2011). Eye movements and word skipping during reading: Effects of word length and predictability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 514-528. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020990 - PubMed
  69. Reichle, E. D. (2021). Computational Models of Reading: A Handbook. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195370669.001.0001 - PubMed
  70. Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., Fisher, D. L., & Rayner, K. (1998). Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review, 105, 125-157. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.105.1.125 - PubMed
  71. Roman, G., & Pavard, B. (1987). A comparative study: How we read in Arabic and French. In J. K. O’Regan & A. Levy-Schoen (Eds.), Eye movements from Physiology to Cognition (pp. 431–440). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-70113-8.50064-3 - PubMed
  72. Schotter, E. R., Lee, M., Reiderman, M., & Rayner, K. (2015). The effect of contextual constraint on parafoveal processing in reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 83, 118-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.04.005 - PubMed
  73. Schwanenflugel, P. J. (1986). Completion norms for final words of sentences using a multiple production measure. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 18, 363-371. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03204419 - PubMed
  74. Sereno, S. C., Hand, C. J., Shahid, A., Yao, B., & O’Donnell, P. J. (2018). Testing the limits of contextual constraint: Interactions with word frequency and parafoveal preview during fluent reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 302-313. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2017.1327981 - PubMed
  75. Staub, A. (2015). The Effect of Lexical Predictability on Eye Movements in Reading: Critical Review and Theoretical Interpretation. Lang & Ling Compass, 9, 311-327. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12151 - PubMed
  76. Staub, A. (2020). Do effects of visual contrast and font difficulty on readers’ eye movements interact with effects of word frequency or predictability? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 46, 1235-1251. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000853 - PubMed
  77. Staub, A., & Benatar, A. (2013). Individual differences in fixation duration distributions in reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 1304-1311. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0444-x - PubMed
  78. Staub, A., & Goddard, K. (2019). The role of preview validity in predictability and frequency effects on eye movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45, 110–127. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000561 - PubMed
  79. Taylor, W. L. (1953). “Cloze procedure”: A new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Quarterly, 30, 415-433. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769905303000401 - PubMed
  80. Tibi, S., & Kirby, J. R. (2017). Morphological awareness: Construct and predictive validity in Arabic. Applied PsychoLinguistics, 38, 1019-1043. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716417000029 - PubMed
  81. Tibi, S., Edwards, A. A., Schatschneider, C., & Kirby, J. R. (2020). Predicting Arabic word reading: A cross-classified generalized random-effects analysis showing the critical role of morphology. Annals of Dyslexia, 70, 200-219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-020-00193-y - PubMed
  82. Velan, H., Deutsch, A., & Frost, R. (2013). The flexibility of letter-position flexibility: Evidence from eye movements in reading Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 1143–1152. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031075 - PubMed
  83. Veldre, A., & Andrews, S. (2018). How does foveal processing difficulty affect parafoveal processing during reading?. Journal of Memory and Language, 103, 74-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.08.001 - PubMed
  84. Venables, W. N., & Ripley, B. D. (2002). Modern applied statistics with S (4th ed.). Springer-Verlag. - PubMed
  85. von der Malsburg, T., & Angele, B. (2017). False positives and other statistical error in standard analyses of eye movements in reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 94, 119–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.10.003 - PubMed
  86. White, S.J., Rayner, K. & Liversedge, S.P. (2005). The influence of parafoveal word length and contextual constraint on fixation durations and word skipping in reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 12, 466-471. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193789 - PubMed
  87. Yablonski, M., Polat, U., Bonneh, Y. S., & Ben-Shachar, M. (2017). Microsaccades are sensitive to word structure: A novel approach to study language processing. Scientific Reports, 7, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-04391-4 - PubMed
  88. Yan, M., Zhou, W., Shu, H., Yusupu, R., Miao, D., Krügel, A., & Kliegl, R. (2014). Eye movements guided by morphological structure: Evidence from the Uighur language. Cognition, 132, 181-215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.03.008 - PubMed
  89. Zhou, W., Wang, A., & Yan, M. (2021). Eye movements and the perceptual span among skilled Uighur readers. Vision Research, 182, 20-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2021.01.005 - PubMed

Publication Types