Literacy Advantages Beyond Reading: Prediction of Spoken Language

Huettig, Falk; Pickering, Martin J.

doi:10.1016/j.tics.2019.03.008

Cited by 65 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 107 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been argued that the letters of visual words up to a certain length can be processed in parallel, unlike the sequential unfolding of sounds in spoken language (Adelman, Marquis, & Sabatos-DeVito, 2010;Radeau, Morais, Mousty, Saerens, & Bertelson, 1992). There are also indications that more than one word can be processed simultaneously in reading (Snell & Grainger, 2019), and it has been argued that reading enables better prediction of upcoming words (Huettig & Pickering, 2019). All these factors help to understand why reading can be faster than listening.…”

Section: Hypotheses Of Why Reading Is Faster Than Listeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…So far we have seen where the idea of 300 wpm as average reading speed came from and why users of the Nelson-Denny test (widely adopted by schools and universities to detect reading problems) felt uneasy about the number, given that the Nelson-Denny norms gave a mean value of 250 wpm. Indeed, another summary measure often reported for normal reading rate is 250-300 wpm (e.g., Galitz, 2007;Huettig & Pickering, 2019;Jonassen, 2004). Because of the discrepancy, a systematic review of the literature is indicated.…”

Section: Two Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How many words do we read per minute? A review and meta-analysis of reading rate

Brysbaert

2019

Journal of Memory and Language

217

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

had a reading rate of 3.9 words per second (234 wpm), the latter a rate of 7.3 words per second (438 wpm). Unfortunately, no information was given about how reading rate had been established. This encouraged Huey (1901) to reassess the issue. He selected 11 pages from an interesting novel, each containing 405 words, which presented no peculiar difficulties to the reader. Twenty university students were asked to read one page at a time while Huey measured the time with a stopwatch. There were 10 conditions. One was normal silent reading ("the way you like to read"). This rate was assessed twice. Another condition was to read silently as fast as possible, while still being able to follow the story line. Two other conditions of interest were reading aloud at a normal pace and at a maximal pace. 1 Huey reported reading rates of 5.35 and 5.91 words per second for silent normal reading (321 and 355 wpm), 8.21 words per second for silent maximal reading (493 wpm), 3.55 words per second for normal reading aloud (213 wpm), and 4.58 words per second for maximal reading aloud (275 wpm). The experiment was included in Huey's hugely influential book The psychology and pedagogy of reading (Huey, 1908), together with the data of Quantz (1898). As such, the very first estimates of normal silent reading were set between 300 and 350 wpm. Tinker An experimental psychologist very active in reading research in the first half of the 20 th century was Tinker. He published a series of over 20 papers addressing various variables that may affect reading speed, such as letter font and various layout options. In most of these studies he used the Chapman-Cook Speed of Reading test. It had two forms, each containing 30 paragraphs of 30 words. Toward the end of the paragraph there was an awkward word spoiling the paragraph. Participants had to tick off the word and finish as many paragraphs as possible in 1.75 minutes. An example of a paragraph was: "Yesterday I went downtown to buy some shoes and rubbers, but when I got home, I found I had forgotten to go to the flower-store to get them." University undergraduates typically finished some 18 paragraphs (540 words) in 1.75 minutes, making a reading speed of 309 wpm. In one of the rare studies taking longer than 1.75 minutes per condition, Tinker (1955) asked his participants to do the task for 30 minutes. They finished on average 317 paragraphs, given a reading rate of 317 wpm (30 words per paragraph and 30 minutes cancelling each other out). Unfortunately, the task was less than optimal, because the * means that the article is part of the meta-analyses

show abstract

Section: Hypotheses Of Why Reading Is Faster Than Listeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Two Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How many words do we read per minute? A review and meta-analysis of reading rate

Brysbaert

2019

Journal of Memory and Language

217

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Notably, such increases in knowledge seem to have general implications for cognitive performance. For example, older adults are more likely to rely on prediction in reading because of their additional reading experience (Huettig & Pickering, 2019). Third, research on expertise suggests that increased cumulative experience leads to domain-specific memory perfor-mance (Sala & Gobet, 2017, for a meta-analysis), such as, for instance, experienced chess players being able to memorize both realistic and random chess position better than novices (Gobet & Simon, 1996).…”

Section: From Experience To Cognitive Performance: Anmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the aging lexicon by linking individuals' experience, semantic networks, and cognitive performance

Du¹,

Deyne²,

Aeschbach³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People undergo many idiosyncratic experiences throughout their lives that may contribute to individual differences in the size and structure of their knowledge representations. Ultimately, these can have important implications for individuals' cognitive performance. We review evidence that suggests a relationship between individual experiences, the size and structure of semantic representations, as well as individual and age differences in cognitive performance. We conclude that the extent to which experience-dependent changes in semantic representations contribute to individual differences in cognitive aging remains unclear. To help fill this gap, we outline an empirical agenda involving the concurrent assessment of large-scale semantic networks and cognitive performance in younger and older adults, and present preliminary data to establish the feasibility and limitations of such empirical approaches.

show abstract

“…Federmeier and colleagues have presented evidence from a series of studies suggesting that healthy adults in their 60s and above engage less in prediction than younger adults (Federmeier et al, 2010;Wlotko & Federmeier, 2012). More recently, Huettig and Janse (2016; see also Huettig & Pickering, 2019) have argued for the opposite, namely that older adults may rely more on prediction, based on findings that age correlates positively with predictive behavior once potentially confounding factors, such as decreased working memory and processing speed, are controlled for. Another relevant factor appears to be L1 literacy and reading experience.…”

Section: Prediction Among Language Users Other Than Native-speaking College Studentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limits on expectation-based processing: Use of grammatical aspect for co-reference in L2

Grüter

Rohde

2020

Applied Psycholinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the use of discourse-level information to create expectations about reference in real-time processing, testing whether patterns previously observed among native speakers of English generalize to nonnative speakers. Findings from a visual-world eye-tracking experiment show that native (L1; N = 53) but not nonnative (L2; N = 52) listeners’ proactive coreference expectations are modulated by grammatical aspect in transfer-of-possession events. Results from an offline judgment task show these L2 participants did not differ from L1 speakers in their interpretation of aspect marking on transfer-of-possession predicates in English, indicating it is not lack of linguistic knowledge but utilization of this knowledge in real-time processing that distinguishes the groups. English proficiency, although varying substantially within the L2 group, did not modulate L2 listeners’ use of grammatical aspect for reference processing. These findings contribute to the broader endeavor of delineating the role of prediction in human language processing in general, and in the processing of discourse-level information among L2 users in particular.

show abstract

Literacy Advantages Beyond Reading: Prediction of Spoken Language

Cited by 65 publications

References 107 publications

How many words do we read per minute? A review and meta-analysis of reading rate

How many words do we read per minute? A review and meta-analysis of reading rate

Understanding the aging lexicon by linking individuals' experience, semantic networks, and cognitive performance

Limits on expectation-based processing: Use of grammatical aspect for co-reference in L2

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About