Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
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 ( IF 2.1 ) Pub Date : 2020-07-30 , DOI: 10.1037/xhp0000853
Adrian Staub 1
Affiliation  

The time a reader's eyes spend on a word is influenced by visual (e.g., contrast) as well as lexical (e.g., word frequency) and contextual (e.g., predictability) factors. Well-known visual word recognition models predict that visual and higher-level manipulations may have interactive effects on early eye movement measures, because of cascaded processing between levels. Previous eye movement studies provide conflicting evidence as to whether they do, possibly because of inconsistent manipulations or limited statistical power. In the present study, 2 highly powered experiments used sentences in which a target word's frequency and predictability were factorially manipulated. Experiment 1 also manipulated visual contrast, and Experiment 2 also manipulated font difficulty. Robust main effects of all manipulations were evident in both experiments. In Experiment 1, interactions between the effect of contrast and the effects of frequency and predictability were numerically small and statistically unreliable in both early (word skipping, first fixation duration) and later (gaze duration, go-past time) measures. In Experiment 2, frequency and predictability did demonstrate convincing interactions with font difficulty, but only in the later measures, possibly implicating a checking mechanism. We conclude that although the predicted interactions in early eye movement measures may exist, they are sufficiently weak that they are difficult to detect even in large eye movement experiments. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译:

视觉对比度和字体难度对读者眼球运动的影响是否与词频或可预测性的影响相互作用?

读者的眼睛花在一个词上的时间受视觉(例如,对比度)以及词汇(例如,词频)和上下文(例如,可预测性)因素的影响。众所周知的视觉词识别模型预测,由于级别之间的级联处理,视觉和更高级别的操作可能会对早期眼动测量产生交互影响。先前的眼动研究提供了相互矛盾的证据,可能是因为操作不一致或统计能力有限。在本研究中,2 个强大的实验使用了其中目标词的频率和可预测性被因子操纵的句子。实验 1 还控制了视觉对比度,实验 2 还控制了字体难度。所有操作的稳健主效应在两个实验中都很明显。在实验 1 中,对比度的影响与频率和可预测性的影响之间的相互作用在数值上很小,并且在早期(单词跳跃,第一次注视持续时间)和后期(凝视持续时间,过去时间)测量中在统计上都不可靠。在实验 2 中,频率和可预测性确实证明了与字体难度的令人信服的交互,但仅在后面的测量中,可能涉及检查机制。我们得出的结论是,尽管可能存在早期眼动测量中预测的相互作用,但它们足够弱,即使在大型眼动实验中也难以检测到。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA,保留所有权利)。对比效应与频率和可预测性效应之间的相互作用在数值上很小,并且在早期(单词跳跃、第一次注视持续时间)和后期(凝视持续时间、过去时间)测量中在统计上都不可靠。在实验 2 中,频率和可预测性确实证明了与字体难度的令人信服的交互,但仅在后面的测量中,可能涉及检查机制。我们得出的结论是,尽管可能存在早期眼动测量中预测的相互作用,但它们足够弱,即使在大型眼动实验中也难以检测到。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA,保留所有权利)。对比效应与频率和可预测性效应之间的相互作用在数值上很小,并且在早期(单词跳跃、第一次注视持续时间)和后期(凝视持续时间、过去时间)测量中在统计上都不可靠。在实验 2 中,频率和可预测性确实证明了与字体难度的令人信服的交互,但仅在后面的测量中,可能涉及检查机制。我们得出的结论是,尽管可能存在早期眼动测量中预测的相互作用,但它们足够弱,即使在大型眼动实验中也难以检测到。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA,保留所有权利)。过去的时间)措施。在实验 2 中,频率和可预测性确实证明了与字体难度的令人信服的交互,但仅在后面的测量中,可能涉及检查机制。我们得出的结论是,尽管可能存在早期眼动测量中预测的相互作用,但它们足够弱,即使在大型眼动实验中也难以检测到。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA,保留所有权利)。过去的时间)措施。在实验 2 中,频率和可预测性确实证明了与字体难度的令人信服的交互,但仅在后面的测量中,可能涉及检查机制。我们得出的结论是,尽管可能存在早期眼动测量中预测的相互作用,但它们足够弱,即使在大型眼动实验中也难以检测到。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA,保留所有权利)。它们足够弱,即使在大型眼球运动实验中也难以检测到。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA,保留所有权利)。它们足够弱,即使在大型眼球运动实验中也难以检测到。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA,保留所有权利)。
更新日期:2020-07-30
down
wechat
bug