Cargando…
Parafoveal‐on‐foveal repetition effects in sentence reading: A co‐registered eye‐tracking and electroencephalogram study
When reading, can the next word in the sentence (word n + 1) influence how you read the word you are currently looking at (word n)? Serial models of sentence reading state that this generally should not be the case, whereas parallel models predict that this should be the case. Here we focus on perha...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7507185/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32091627 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13553 |
_version_ | 1783585179759017984 |
---|---|
author | Mirault, Jonathan Yeaton, Jeremy Broqua, Fanny Dufau, Stéphane Holcomb, Phillip J. Grainger, Jonathan |
author_facet | Mirault, Jonathan Yeaton, Jeremy Broqua, Fanny Dufau, Stéphane Holcomb, Phillip J. Grainger, Jonathan |
author_sort | Mirault, Jonathan |
collection | PubMed |
description | When reading, can the next word in the sentence (word n + 1) influence how you read the word you are currently looking at (word n)? Serial models of sentence reading state that this generally should not be the case, whereas parallel models predict that this should be the case. Here we focus on perhaps the simplest and the strongest Parafoveal‐on‐Foveal (PoF) manipulation: word n + 1 is either the same as word n or a different word. Participants read sentences for comprehension and when their eyes left word n, the repeated or unrelated word at position n + 1 was swapped for a word that provided a syntactically correct continuation of the sentence. We recorded electroencephalogram and eye‐movements, and time‐locked the analysis of fixation‐related potentials (FRPs) to fixation of word n. We found robust PoF repetition effects on gaze durations on word n, and also on the initial landing position on word n. Most important is that we also observed significant effects in FRPs, reaching significance at 260 ms post‐fixation of word n. Repetition of the target word n at position n + 1 caused a widely distributed reduced negativity in the FRPs. Given the timing of this effect, we argue that it is driven by orthographic processing of word n + 1, while readers were still looking at word n, plus the spatial integration of orthographic information extracted from these two words in parallel. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7507185 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75071852020-09-28 Parafoveal‐on‐foveal repetition effects in sentence reading: A co‐registered eye‐tracking and electroencephalogram study Mirault, Jonathan Yeaton, Jeremy Broqua, Fanny Dufau, Stéphane Holcomb, Phillip J. Grainger, Jonathan Psychophysiology Original Articles When reading, can the next word in the sentence (word n + 1) influence how you read the word you are currently looking at (word n)? Serial models of sentence reading state that this generally should not be the case, whereas parallel models predict that this should be the case. Here we focus on perhaps the simplest and the strongest Parafoveal‐on‐Foveal (PoF) manipulation: word n + 1 is either the same as word n or a different word. Participants read sentences for comprehension and when their eyes left word n, the repeated or unrelated word at position n + 1 was swapped for a word that provided a syntactically correct continuation of the sentence. We recorded electroencephalogram and eye‐movements, and time‐locked the analysis of fixation‐related potentials (FRPs) to fixation of word n. We found robust PoF repetition effects on gaze durations on word n, and also on the initial landing position on word n. Most important is that we also observed significant effects in FRPs, reaching significance at 260 ms post‐fixation of word n. Repetition of the target word n at position n + 1 caused a widely distributed reduced negativity in the FRPs. Given the timing of this effect, we argue that it is driven by orthographic processing of word n + 1, while readers were still looking at word n, plus the spatial integration of orthographic information extracted from these two words in parallel. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-02-24 2020-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7507185/ /pubmed/32091627 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13553 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Psychophysiology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society for Psychophysiological Research This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Mirault, Jonathan Yeaton, Jeremy Broqua, Fanny Dufau, Stéphane Holcomb, Phillip J. Grainger, Jonathan Parafoveal‐on‐foveal repetition effects in sentence reading: A co‐registered eye‐tracking and electroencephalogram study |
title | Parafoveal‐on‐foveal repetition effects in sentence reading: A co‐registered eye‐tracking and electroencephalogram study |
title_full | Parafoveal‐on‐foveal repetition effects in sentence reading: A co‐registered eye‐tracking and electroencephalogram study |
title_fullStr | Parafoveal‐on‐foveal repetition effects in sentence reading: A co‐registered eye‐tracking and electroencephalogram study |
title_full_unstemmed | Parafoveal‐on‐foveal repetition effects in sentence reading: A co‐registered eye‐tracking and electroencephalogram study |
title_short | Parafoveal‐on‐foveal repetition effects in sentence reading: A co‐registered eye‐tracking and electroencephalogram study |
title_sort | parafoveal‐on‐foveal repetition effects in sentence reading: a co‐registered eye‐tracking and electroencephalogram study |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7507185/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32091627 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13553 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT miraultjonathan parafovealonfovealrepetitioneffectsinsentencereadingacoregisteredeyetrackingandelectroencephalogramstudy AT yeatonjeremy parafovealonfovealrepetitioneffectsinsentencereadingacoregisteredeyetrackingandelectroencephalogramstudy AT broquafanny parafovealonfovealrepetitioneffectsinsentencereadingacoregisteredeyetrackingandelectroencephalogramstudy AT dufaustephane parafovealonfovealrepetitioneffectsinsentencereadingacoregisteredeyetrackingandelectroencephalogramstudy AT holcombphillipj parafovealonfovealrepetitioneffectsinsentencereadingacoregisteredeyetrackingandelectroencephalogramstudy AT graingerjonathan parafovealonfovealrepetitioneffectsinsentencereadingacoregisteredeyetrackingandelectroencephalogramstudy |