» Articles » PMID: 26085919

Individual Differences in Eye-Movements During Reading: Working Memory and Speed-of-Processing Effects

Overview
Journal J Eye Mov Res
Date 2015 Jun 19
PMID 26085919
Citations 15
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Theories of eye-movement control in reading should ultimately describe how differences in knowledge and cognitive abilities affect reading and comprehension. Current mathematical models of eye-movement control do not yet incorporate individual differences as a source of variation in reading, although developmental and group-difference effects have been studied. These models nonetheless provide an excellent foundation for describing and explaining how and why patterns of eye-movements differ across readers (e.g., Rayner, Chace, & Ashby, 2006). Our focus in this article is on two aspects of individual variation: global processing speed (e.g., Salthouse, 1996) and working-memory capacity (e.g., Just & Carpenter, 1992). Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) (Raudenbush & Bryk, 2001), we tested the extent to which overall reading speed and working-memory capacity moderate the degree to which syntactic and semantic information affect fixation times. Previous published data (Traxler et al., 2005) showed that working memory capacity and syntactic complexity interacted to determine fixation times in an eye-movement monitoring experiment. In a new set of models based on this same data set, we found that working-memory capacity interacted with sentence-characteristic variables only when processing speed was not included in the model. We interpret these findings with respect to current accounts of sentence processing and suggest how they might be incorporated into eye-movement control models.

Citing Articles

The Mechanism of Word Satiation in Tibetan Reading: Evidence from Eye Movements.

Li X, Zeng M, Gao L, Li S, Niu Z, Wang D J Eye Mov Res. 2023; 15(5).

PMID: 37779864 PMC: 10541290. DOI: 10.16910/jemr.15.5.3.


Eye Movements during Reading and their Relationship to Reading Assessment Outcomes in Swedish Elementary School Children.

Strandberg A, Nilsson M, Ostberg P, Oqvist Seimyr G J Eye Mov Res. 2023; 15(4).

PMID: 37229424 PMC: 10205180. DOI: 10.16910/jemr.15.4.3.


Individual Differences in Cue Weighting in Sentence Comprehension: An Evaluation Using Approximate Bayesian Computation.

Yadav H, Paape D, Smith G, Dillon B, Vasishth S Open Mind (Camb). 2022; 6:1-24.

PMID: 36439070 PMC: 9692063. DOI: 10.1162/opmi_a_00052.


Robust Effects of Working Memory Demand during Naturalistic Language Comprehension in Language-Selective Cortex.

Shain C, Blank I, Fedorenko E, Gibson E, Schuler W J Neurosci. 2022; 42(39):7412-7430.

PMID: 36002263 PMC: 9525168. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1894-21.2022.


Working memory control predicts fixation duration in scene-viewing.

Loh Z, Hall E, Cronin D, Henderson J Psychol Res. 2022; 87(4):1143-1154.

PMID: 35879564 PMC: 11129724. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-022-01694-8.


References
1.
Reichle E, Warren T, McConnell K . Using E-Z Reader to model the effects of higher level language processing on eye movements during reading. Psychon Bull Rev. 2009; 16(1):1-21. PMC: 2629133. DOI: 10.3758/PBR.16.1.1. View

2.
Salthouse T . The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition. Psychol Rev. 1996; 103(3):403-28. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.103.3.403. View

3.
Engbert R, Nuthmann A, Richter E, Kliegl R . SWIFT: a dynamical model of saccade generation during reading. Psychol Rev. 2005; 112(4):777-813. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.777. View

4.
Ashby J, Rayner K, Clifton C . Eye movements of highly skilled and average readers: differential effects of frequency and predictability. Q J Exp Psychol A. 2005; 58(6):1065-86. DOI: 10.1080/02724980443000476. View

5.
Caplan D, Waters G . Verbal working memory and sentence comprehension. Behav Brain Sci. 2001; 22(1):77-94; discussion 95-126. DOI: 10.1017/s0140525x99001788. View