scholarly journals Orthographic and root frequency effects in Arabic: Evidence from eye movements and lexical decision.

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. 934-954 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ehab W. Hermena ◽  
Simon P. Liversedge ◽  
Sana Bouamama ◽  
Denis Drieghe
2007 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 419-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. H. Baayen ◽  
Lee H. Wurm ◽  
Joanna Aycock

In this study we examine the word recognition process for low-frequency morphologically complex words. One goal of the study was to replicate and expand upon findings suggesting facilitative effects of morphological relatives of a target word. A second goal was to demonstrate the need for a reinterpretation of root and surface frequency effects, which traditionally have been taken as indicators of parsing-based and memory-driven processing, respectively. In a first study, we used the same stimuli across auditory and visual lexical decision and naming. Mixed-effects statistical modeling revealed that surface frequency was a robust predictor of RTs even in the very low end of the distribution, but root frequency was not. Also, the nature of the similarity between a target and its lexical competitors is crucial. Measures gauging the influence of morphological relatives of the target were facilitative, while measures gauging the influence of words related only in form were inhibitory. A second study analyzing data from the English Lexicon Project, for a large sample of words from across the full frequency range, supports these conclusions. An information-theoretical analysis of root and surface frequency explains why surface frequency must be the most important predictor, with only a marginal role for root frequency.


Author(s):  
Richard Shillcock

This article examines the relationship between eye movements and word recognition, moving from what we know about isolated word recognition to the reading of text. There are clear points of contact between behaviour in laboratory tasks with isolated words and word recognition in text; for instance, Schilling et al. (1998) have shown consistent word frequency effects in naming, lexical decision, and fixation times in silent reading. However, there are also major differences between these two domains. Radach and Kennedy (2004) cite “integration with work on single word recognition” as an issue for future reading research. Equally, though, research on isolated visual word recognition can benefit from a consideration of normal reading; when a word is processed in isolation, its normal context has been replaced by a “null” context. The article concentrates on some of the anatomical and computational principles governing access to the mental lexicon. First, it considers eye movements in reading isolated words and then explores how fixation in word recognition is controlled. Finally, the article discusses the issues raised by binocularity.


2013 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holly S. S. L. Joseph ◽  
Kate Nation ◽  
Simon P. Liversedge

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-82
Author(s):  
Olga Parshina ◽  
Anna K. Laurinavichyute ◽  
Irina A. Sekerina

AbstractThis eye-tracking study establishes basic benchmarks of eye movements during reading in heritage language (HL) by Russian-speaking adults and adolescents of high (n = 21) and low proficiency (n = 27). Heritage speakers (HSs) read sentences in Cyrillic, and their eye movements were compared to those of Russian monolingual skilled adult readers, 8-year-old children and L2 learners. Reading patterns of HSs revealed longer mean fixation durations, lower skipping probabilities, and higher regressive saccade rates than in monolingual adults. High-proficient HSs were more similar to monolingual children, while low-proficient HSs performed on par with L2 learners. Low-proficient HSs differed from high-proficient HSs in exhibiting lower skipping probabilities, higher fixation counts, and larger frequency effects. Taken together, our findings are consistent with the weaker links account of bilingual language processing as well as the divergent attainment theory of HL.


2001 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 317-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Delphine Dahan ◽  
James S. Magnuson ◽  
Michael K. Tanenhaus

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document