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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mirault, Jonathan, Yeaton, Jeremy, Broqua, Fanny, Dufau, Stéphane, Holcomb, Phillip J., Grainger, Jonathan
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