Word<i>n</i> + 2 preview effects in three-character Chinese idioms and phrases

Yu, Lili; Cutter, Michael G.; Yan, Guoli; Bai, Xuejun; Fu, Yu; Drieghe, Denis; Liversedge, Simon Paul

doi:10.1080/23273798.2016.1197954

Cited by 20 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 45 publications

(43 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given that our preview manipulation extended across both of these words it does not seem unreasonable to assume that any effect of our manipulation may be more likely to appear in a complex manner across both of these words in a way that may not be detected through the analysis of the individual words. More generally, recent research has shown that preview manipulations on word n+2 may appear more clearly in composite, but not separate, regions especially when skipping rates of one of the regions is high (see Yu, Cutter, Yan, Bai, Fu, Drieghe, & Liversedge, 2016). The means and standard deviations of these measures are displayed in Table 1.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is orthographic information from multiple parafoveal words processed in parallel: An eye-tracking study.

Cutter

Drieghe

Liversedge

2017

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the current study we investigated whether orthographic information available from 1 upcoming parafoveal word influences the processing of another parafoveal word. Across 2 experiments we used the boundary paradigm (Rayner, 1975) to present participants with an identity preview of the 2 words after the boundary (e.g., hot pan), a preview in which 2 letters were transposed between these words (e.g., hop tan), or a preview in which the same 2 letters were substituted (e.g., hob fan). We hypothesized that if these 2 words were processed in parallel in the parafovea then we may observe significant preview benefits for the condition in which the letters were transposed between words relative to the condition in which the letters were substituted. However, no such effect was observed, with participants fixating the words for the same amount of time in both conditions. This was the case both when the transposition was made between the final and first letter of the 2 words (e.g., hop tan as a preview of hot pan; Experiment 1) and when the transposition maintained within word letter position (e.g., pit hop as a preview of hit pop; Experiment 2). The implications of these findings are considered in relation to serial and parallel lexical processing during reading. Public Significance StatementThe findings of the present study suggest that readers of English only process letter information from 1 word at a time. Participants did not read any faster when 2 letters had been swapped between 2 upcoming words prior to participants looking directly at them (e.g., sit pea instead of sip tea) than when these same 2 letters had been replaced with alternative letters (e.g., six sea). These findings demonstrate that the human language processing system tends to identify words 1 at a time in serial order, rather than identifying multiple words at the same time.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is orthographic information from multiple parafoveal words processed in parallel: An eye-tracking study.

Cutter

Drieghe

Liversedge

2017

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In an attempt to move the issue forward, a theoretical hypothesis, the Multi-Constituent Unit (MCU) Hypothesis has been developed that may, at least in certain circumstances, offer a way of reconciling parallel processing of words during reading with serial accounts. The account was put forward in a keynote address to the European Conference on Eye Movements by Liversedge [63] and has been outlined briefly in published work [64,65]. The idea behind the MCU Hypothesis is that some linguistic units that occur in the language, are comprised of multiple words, such as spaced compound words, binomial word pairs, idioms, and other common phrases, and these may be represented lexically as single representations.…”

Section: Beyond Serialism and Parallelism: A Multi-constituent Unit Hmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some empirical evidence has shown that spaced compounds operate as MCUs in English [64], and that foveal processing can occur across MCUs in Chinese [65]. Cutter et al [64] constructed sentences containing spaced compounds, that is, MCUs comprised of two frequently co-occurring words that refer to a single concept (e.g., teddy bear).…”

Section: Beyond Serialism and Parallelism: A Multi-constituent Unit Hmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Beyond the investigation of two-character compounds and phrases, Yu et al [65] examined whether there are linguistically meaningful lexical representations associated with idioms that are comprised of three characters (a single-character verb and a two-character noun). Yu et al obtained evidence to suggest that the idioms were processed foveally as a single lexical unit.…”

Section: Beyond Serialism and Parallelism: A Multi-constituent Unit Hmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

New Perspectives on Serialism and Parallelism in Oculomotor Control During Reading: The Multi-Constituent Unit Hypothesis

Zang

2019

Vision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Currently there are several computational models of eye movement control that provide a good account of oculomotor behavior during reading of English and other alphabetic languages. I will provide an overview of two dominant models: E-Z Reader and SWIFT, as well as a recently proposed model: OB1-Reader. I will evaluate a critical issue of controversy among models, namely, whether words are lexically processed serially or in parallel. I will then consider reading in Chinese, a character-based, unspaced language with ambiguous word boundaries. Finally, I will evaluate the concepts of serialism and parallelism of process central to these models, and how these models might function in relation to lexical processing that is operationalized over parafoveal multi-constituent units.

show abstract

“…Cui et al 2014 removed participants to reduce the exclusion rate, Yu, et al, 2016 reported exclusion rates of 27-35%).…”

Section: Footnotesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parafoveal preview effects in reading unspaced text.

Drieghe¹,

Fitzsimmons²,

Liversedge³

2017

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In English reading, eye guidance relies heavily on the spaces between words for demarcating word boundaries. In an eye tracking experiment, we examined the impact of removing spaces on parafoveal processing. Using the gaze-contingent boundary paradigm (Rayner, 1975), a high or low frequency pre-boundary word was followed by a post-boundary preview presented either normally (i.e. identical to the postboundary word), or with letters replaced creating an orthographically illegal preview.The spaces between words were either retained or removed. Results replicate previous findings of increased reading times during unspaced reading (Rayner, Fischer & Pollatsek, 1998) and indicate rather limited evidence for more distributed processing:Observations of processing of the previous word (spill-over effects) or processing of the next word (parafoveal-on-foveal effects) influencing fixation durations on the currently fixated word were limited. Spill-over effects were only observed in the unspaced layout when the post-boundary preview was correct, presumably because the orthographically illegal, incorrect preview was visually salient enough to allow for relatively easy word segmentation and therefore more focused processing of the preboundary word. As such, results points towards a system that prefers narrowly focused processing of a single word, at least when means for easy word segmentation are available. 3Statement of the Public Significance of the Work.In the influential gaze contingent boundary paradigm (Rayner, 1975), before the eyes cross an invisible boundary during reading, a preview is presented at the location of the target word that can either be identical to the target word or manipulated to be related to a certain extent with the target word (e.g. number of shared letters). After the eyes cross the boundary, a display change is carried out replacing the preview with the target word. Using this paradigm we examined the impact of removing spaces between the words. Results replicate previous findings of increased reading times during unspaced reading and indicate rather limited evidence for distributed processing when means for easy word segmentation were available (either spaces or an orthographically illegal string of letters in the preview). 4Reading is a complex, cognitive task that has to accommodate a limitation in our visual system in that the fine-grained visual acuity necessary to identify letters is mostly restricted to a limited area of the retina, the fovea, which receives input from only the central 2 degrees of the visual field (for reviews, see Rayner, 1998;Rayner, 2009). As a consequence, reading typically requires a multitude of fixations and saccades to allow sampling of visual information at different locations across the text.Nevertheless, a large body of evidence indicates that besides the currently fixated word, readers do routinely pick up information from the upcoming word as well (for a review, see Schotter, Angele, & Rayner, 2012). The upcoming word will typically be in an area cal...

show abstract

Wordn + 2 preview effects in three-character Chinese idioms and phrases

Cited by 20 publications

References 45 publications

Is orthographic information from multiple parafoveal words processed in parallel: An eye-tracking study.

Is orthographic information from multiple parafoveal words processed in parallel: An eye-tracking study.

New Perspectives on Serialism and Parallelism in Oculomotor Control During Reading: The Multi-Constituent Unit Hypothesis

Parafoveal preview effects in reading unspaced text.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About