Same Tasks Over Again Faster Motion Rote

Introduction

Co-ordinate to influential models of reading development (east.g., Frith, 1985), children'southward initial reading acquisition in school begins with decoding. They need to larn the alphabetic code (individual messages) and grapheme-phoneme correspondences (the sound that belongs to each grapheme) to apply them during reading (Grainger and Ziegler, 2011). More recently, approaches to reading conquering have focused on the recognition of syllables or morphemes rather than letters before beginning readers tin transition to whole-word processing (Hasenäcker and Schroeder, 2017). Through reading practice, beginners become familiar with orthographic units (such every bit words) and link the orthographic structure onto meaning (Shaywitz and Shaywitz, 2005). Only at an advanced level are readers able to decode and comprehend the reading material fluently and effortlessly (due east.g., words, sentences, and text).

1 model that is commonly used to explain reading processes is the dual-route cascaded model (DRC) of visual word recognition and reading aloud (cf. e.g., Hawelka et al., 2010); it is a computational realization of the dual-route theory of reading (Coltheart et al., 2001). The model postulates 2 parallel, competitive routes for word recognition. At visual presentation of a word (i.eastward., a string of messages or graphemes), the model identifies the entire word past sight via the faster lexical route and activates its representation in the orthographic input dictionary. A successful match leads to an activation of the give-and-take's semantic and phonological representation to read the word silently or aloud. The activation of a discussion in the orthographic dictionary is influenced past its frequency of occurrence: Loftier frequency words need less activation and they are recognized faster than low frequency words (Inhoff and Rayner, 1986; Coltheart et al., 2001). Therefore, the lexical route is sensitive to word frequency furnishings (Yap et al., 2012). The representation of unfamiliar words and nonwords is processed through the model's slower nonlexical road. These words are not yet fully represented in a reader'due south orthographic input dictionary. Thus, but the grapheme-phoneme correspondences tin be used for decoding. This route is sensitive to word length effects, but non word frequency, because of its serial grapheme-phoneme decoding (Yap et al., 2012).

Developing readers differ from advanced readers in the number of words that are represented in their orthographic lexicon (Coltheart, 2006). At the commencement stages of reading, the novice readers decode words via the nonlexical route using grapheme-phoneme-correspondences. Through regular reading practice, they can quantitatively expand their orthographic lexicon and process words via the lexical route (Coltheart, 2006).

There is empirical evidence for a straight link betwixt lexicon size and reading skills taken from studies with children. A longitudinal study with Dutch children in grades 1–vi found that the children's lexicon size directly relates to their word decoding skills during reading (Verhoeven et al., 2011). In each class, the authors tested the children's lexicon size and discussion decoding or reading comprehension. Dictionary size of the younger children (grades 1 and ii) was measured with a receptive vocabulary test during which children saw four pictures and were asked to choose the picture that was uttered aloud by the experimenter (no time limit). To appraise their word decoding skills, the younger children were asked to read aloud several words from a give-and-take card as accurately and apace as possible (time limit of i min per bill of fare). The stimulus words were oft used Dutch words. To assess the older children'due south (form 3–half-dozen) dictionary size (written vocabulary skills), a multiple-option detail exam was administered. Children read a sentence with an underlined target discussion and and then were asked to select the response with the same pregnant from four alternatives. I distractor resembled the target discussion phonologically, some other came from the same semantic domain, and the third was previously presented every bit an oral option during pilot-testing of the chore. The older children's reading comprehension was tested with a serial of v texts and multiple-pick questions following the reading. These items addressed explicit and implicit pregnant relationships between sentences in each of the texts.

The authors found significant developmental progress in children'southward lexicon size, word decoding, and reading comprehension skills from commencement to sixth grade (Verhoeven et al., 2011). They also establish a stiff association betwixt the younger and older children's performance on the vocabulary tests, fifty-fifty though the two tests assessed basic oral vocabulary and the more advanced written vocabulary noesis. Interestingly, the lexicon size'south development of outset readers (grades ane and 2) predicted their subsequent reading comprehension. The higher their correctly identified number of lexical items in the receptive vocabulary test, the more successful their give-and-take identification and comprehension during reading. This means that the larger the lexicon size, the meliorate the reading skills, since words tin can be identified, recognized, and mapped more than hands onto existing representations in the orthographic lexicon. Apparently, readers with typically developing reading skills benefit from the lexical route more than often and identify words past sight as a whole once their orthographic lexicon has been substantially built up.

Contrary to typically developing readers, children with reading difficulties or developmental dyslexia have issues with accurate and fluent processing of larger orthographic units such as words. Therefore, they keep to rely on the give-and-take's phonological representation with slower or delayed lexical access (Spinelli et al., 2005; Ziegler and Goswami, 2005; Hawelka et al., 2010). This has been demonstrated in a phonological and orthographic lexical decision chore in German with young adults, ages 15–xviii (Bergmann and Wimmer, 2008). In the phonological lexical conclusion task, a dyslexic group and a command group were presented with words (e.g., Taxi), pseudohomophones (due east.k., Taksi) that contain a dissimilar grapheme realization for the same phoneme, and nonwords (e.1000., Tazi). In the phonological lexical decision task, the participants were asked to determine whether the word was pronounced like a real word. In the orthographic lexical determination chore, they saw the same words or pseudohomophones and were asked to make up one's mind whether the discussion was spelled correctly. This second chore probed the participants' orthographic noesis on the same items; notation that nonwords were judged simply in the phonological lexical conclusion chore. The dyslexic group exhibited slower and fewer correct responses compared to the control group for words and pseudohomophones in both tasks. Further, the dyslexic grouping exhibited an increase in error rates and latency from phonological to orthographic decisions, whereas the control grouping exhibited a subtract of fault rates and no difference in latency from phonological to orthographic decisions. Some other interesting finding was the distinction between orthographically known and unknown words. Both groups exhibited faster phonological decisions for orthographically known words than for orthographically unknown words and pseudohomophones. The authors interpret this finding every bit a reliance on the lexical route for orthographically known words in both groups, only the dyslexic group indicated a speed damage, which was reflected in slower latencies compared to the control group. The authors also revealed that the slower phonological decisions for pseudohomophones and nonwords of the dyslexic grouping compared to the controls could reverberate a speed harm of the dyslexic group on the nonlexical route (Bergmann and Wimmer, 2008). Therefore, developing readers with difficulties or developmental dyslexia need additional and specific reading practice to improve their decoding skills toward fast whole-word recognition via the lexical road and to build a substantial orthographic lexicon to increase reading fluency (Kuhn and Stahl, 2003).

To straight investigate the movements of the eye during reading, researchers use centre-tracking. This method tin specially be employed to shed light on reading processes during silent reading. The unlike stages of reading development are reflected in feature eye movement patterns. Children fixate longer on words and accept a higher tendency to fixate on a give-and-take more oftentimes. They regress more than often to previously read words and refixate on words more frequently, probably due to the less targeted fixation on a word that increases the likelihood of a 2d fixation on the same word. If the eyes land on a word in a position where information technology cannot be identified, and then a refixation on the same discussion becomes more likely (McConkie et al., 1991). Children also skip fewer words during reading than skilled readers (e.g., adults). This might point that the skipped word has already been identified on a prior fixation or without a direct fixation (McConkie et al., 1991). Adults showroom more adult reading patterns with shorter and more targeted fixations on a word and fewer regressions to previously read cloth (McConkie et al., 1991; Rayner, 1998).

The E-Z reader model is a computational model of center movement control, which simulates specific aspects of reading power (e.k., orthographic noesis, phonological processing, and sentence comprehension). The E-Z reader model simulates eye-tracking data from adults and children with varying reading levels (Reichle et al., 2013). To disentangle possible influences of linguistic backdrop on reading behavior, certain parameters of the model tin be varied to directly simulate the eye movement patterns. Originally, the model's parameters were established to fit the center movement patterns of skilled adult readers. These parameters were then systematically inverse to simulate the eye movements of children during reading (Mancheva et al., 2015). The respective parameter that required adjustment was the charge per unit of lexical processing. Mancheva et al. suggest "that skilled reading […] may reverberate improve orthographic knowledge" (Mancheva et al., 2015, p. 672). These simulations with the E-Z reader model seem to indicate that the differences betwixt children's and adult's eye movements could exist explained past the proficiency of lexical processing and orthographic knowledge (Reichle et al., 2013; Mancheva et al., 2015).

Eye-tracking studies with adults take revealed a straight influence of ii linguistic properties, word length and frequency, on their eye movements during reading (Rayner, 1998, Rayner, 2009). Generally, compared to short words, long words are fixated longer and more ofttimes (Hyönä and Olson, 1995; But and Carpenter, 1980; Kliegl et al., 2004). High frequency words are read faster and take less time to process than low frequency words (Hyönä and Olson, 1995; Kliegl et al., 2004). Word frequency and word length are highly correlated such that short words are often highly frequent. But even when word frequency remains abiding, there is still a word length effect such that long words are fixated for a longer time (Liversedge et al., 2004).

Centre-tracking studies with children as well have explored these discussion property effects—give-and-take length and frequency—during oral reading (Hyönä and Olson, 1995; Huestegge et al., 2009; Rau et al., 2014; Rau et al., 2015) and silent reading (Tiffin-Richards and Schroeder, 2015). Children exhibit fifty-fifty stronger word length and frequency effects on eye movement measures than adults (Blythe and Joseph, 2011; Tiffin-Richards and Schroeder, 2015). A few eye-tracking studies with children have included both factors—discussion length and frequency—in their experimental designs for English (Hyönä and Olson, 1995; Rau et al., 2015), Italian (De Luca et al., 1999), and German language (Huestegge et al., 2009; Rau et al., 2014; Rau et al., 2015; Dejeuner-Richards and Schroeder, 2015).

We now review the middle-tracking studies with children that investigated word length and frequency furnishings during reading in English and German. Hyönä and Olson (1995) found robust discussion length and frequency effects for dyslexic children (12–17 years old) and a control group (9–12 years old) in English oral reading. Gaze durations were longer for long words compared to short words, but this outcome stemmed primarily from a greater number of fixations on longer words. Low frequency words were fixated longer than high frequency words in outset fixation and gaze elapsing. Further, the interaction of discussion length and frequency was significant, with a larger word length upshot for low frequency than high frequency words (in first fixation and gaze elapsing). Rau et al. (2015) found word length effects for two groups of English language- and German-speaking children (9–ten years) in gaze duration and give-and-take frequency effects in start fixation and gaze elapsing. Similar to Hyönä and Olson (1995) for English children, they report a stronger word length event for depression frequency compared to high frequency words for the group of German children in first fixation and gaze duration.

In some other study, Rau et al. (2014) investigated gaze duration of German-speaking second-graders (7; 10 years), 3rd-graders (8; 8 years), fourth-graders (10; two years), and young adults (24; six years) for high frequency words, low frequency words, and nonwords of differing length that were embedded in sentences. The authors also found word length furnishings that were modulated by frequency, simply only for skilled readers (third- and quaternary-graders and adults). Second-graders exhibited an equal give-and-take length effect for low frequency words, high frequency words, and nonwords. Curt high frequency words were read faster than short low frequency words and short nonwords, suggesting that the former were read by direct lexical access and the latter by series decoding. In more experienced readers (third- and quaternary-graders and adults) the word length consequence increased with decreasing give-and-take frequency. Third-graders exhibited a continuous reduction in length effects from nonwords to low frequency words through high frequency words. Fourth-graders demonstrated a like design to adults: significant but less marked discussion length effects for high and depression frequency words and strong length furnishings for nonwords. The authors interpret this finding as the transition from serial nonlexical reading with slower lexical processing (second graders) to directly lexical access of the whole word (third-graders and older). Similarly, in a longitudinal study with second- and 4th-graders in German, Huestegge et al. (2009) found a decreasing give-and-take length and frequency effect in gaze duration and total reading time from 2nd course (eight years) to fourth course (x years). However, there was no interaction of word length and frequency in whatever of the eye movement measures or groups.

To our knowledge, in that location is only one eye-tracking written report on silent reading with High german-speaking children, conducted by Tiffin-Richards and Schroeder (2015). They measured the heart movements of 75 children (second grade) and an adult control group during silent reading. The authors institute a significant word length effect in gaze elapsing and total reading fourth dimension and an inversed effect for word length in first fixation duration such that children fixated longer on brusk words than on long words. However, this could be explained past a college number of short fixations on long words instead of one single long fixation. Regarding word frequency, the children exhibited significant effects in first fixation duration, gaze duration, and total reading time in the expected direction. The interaction of give-and-take length and frequency yielded significant effects in gaze duration and full reading time, with a discussion length issue that was modulated by frequency: The children's middle movements revealed a greater give-and-take length effect for low frequency than high frequency words in gaze elapsing and full reading time (similar to Hyönä and Olson, 1995; Rau et al., 2014; Rau et al., 2015).

Nigh of these previously mentioned studies used an oral reading paradigm rather than silent reading. Are reading patterns comparable in both reading modes? To answer this question, we can draw on results from simply ii middle-tracking studies with adults. Inhoff et al. (2011) compared the two modalities and demonstrated that skilled readers exhibited like reading patterns during silent and oral reading. In oral reading, adults continue their eyes relatively shut to the articulated word with only one or two words as an eye-voice distance. Additionally, Laubrock and Kliegl (2015) report that middle movements are qualitatively like during silent and oral reading. In oral reading, average fixations were about l ms longer than in silent reading, and saccade lengths were shorter, with fewer regressions due to articulation (Laubrock and Kliegl, 2015). They explicate this small lag of the eyes behind the vocalism with the phonological information that is still held in working memory and is used to comprehend the words. Chiefly, Laubrock and Kliegl (2015) found similar word length and frequency furnishings in both reading modalities (oral and silent). These findings are important because silent reading is easier for children since they practise not need to pronounce the words correctly and fluently while all the same processing and comprehending them. If silent and oral reading yield similar results, then the more natural and easier reading modality tin be used for eye-tracking experiments.

Aims of the Present Study

Frequently, studies on children's reading behavior compared their eye movements to adults or skilled readers. We extended this research and compared eye movements of two groups of children from the same age group, namely, dull- and fast-reading children categorized according to their oral reading speed. It is however unknown whether or how these groups differ in their reading patterns, since simply very few eye-tracking studies accept focused on get-go and slightly more than avant-garde readers (i.eastward., children with 5 to 6 years of reading experience) processing connected texts. Due to the lack of research in this specific area of interest, we aimed to investigate the reading behavior of German-speaking children including several novel aspects. We used text passages taken from real books and nerveless our data during silent reading in their school environment. These novel aspects were chosen to increment the ecological validity of our data. For that purpose, we used two continued texts from a published children's book equally reading material. This approach is different from the use of unmarried words or sentence frames with embedded target words that were often artificially synthetic as material in other experimental studies on reading (due east.thou., Luncheon-Richards and Schroeder, 2015; but see limitations in section Discussion). We opted for this fabric to investigate the natural reading behavior of embedded target words of our participants in age-appropriate literature. Furthermore, we used a mobile eye-tracking device to be able to collect the data in a familiar environs rather than in a laboratory.

Based on the findings reported in Verhoeven et al. (2011) considering the relatedness of lexicon size and decoding skills in young readers, we assume that, compared to slow readers, fast readers have a larger orthographic lexicon and that they can recognize whole words faster. We predicted that fast and slow readers would differ in speed of word recognition during silent reading of continued text, confirming the group nomenclature based on their speed when reading aloud. Therefore, we expected fast readers to exhibit overall faster word processing on all eye-tracking measures, for example, shorter first fixation durations, shorter gaze durations, and a shorter total reading time than slow readers.

Further, we were peculiarly interested in the effects of word length and frequency in the children'due south middle movements. We predicted that all children would showroom word length and frequency effects similar to previous findings in gaze elapsing and full reading fourth dimension. Additionally, we had grouping-specific predictions based on the competitive DRC model. We assumed that lexical processing of slow readers might still rely mainly on the default road of nonlexical decoding. Processes based on serial grapheme-phoneme correspondence processes are slower, and, consequently, series decoding processes should exist more strongly influenced by word length than by frequency. Therefore, we expected a stronger word length consequence for tedious readers than for fast readers. Contrarily, for fast readers, we causeless that processing would not mainly be executed via the nonlexical route. Hither, both routes are, indeed, competitive, and the faster lexical route should exist used more than oftentimes for processing in this grouping. Lexical processing involving fast recognition of whole words in fast readers should, therefore, be influenced by lexical characteristics of words such equally frequency. Hence, fast readers should showroom a give-and-take length event that might be modulated by word frequency, and this interaction effect of discussion length and frequency should exist stronger for fast readers than for wearisome readers. In particular, the word length effect should be stronger for low frequency words compared to loftier frequency words for fast readers reflected by their more adult-like reading behaviour.

This way, we might detect a developmental stardom between fast lexical and slow nonlexical processing in the grouping's center motion patterns, indicating that each group—although having the same age—is likely on a different stage of reading evolution (following assumptions of the DRC model). More specifically, in the fast-reader group, both routes are in competition and are already used flexibly, depending on the reading material; processing in the other, slower grouping is still more than or less limited to the boring road of nonlexical serial decoding.

Materials and Methods

Participants

We tested 74 children in fifth grade (27 females, mean historic period of 10.vi ± 0.6 years) and 27 children in sixth course (12 females, mean age of 11.8 ± 0.8 years). The children were attending vi unlike primary schools in Brandenburg, Frg.

This study had been approved past the ethics committee of the University of Potsdam and was performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. All children participated voluntarily after their parents provided written and informed consent. The parents received ten€ compensation for their children's participation. All participants were High german speakers and had normal or corrected-to-normal vision.

Participant Group for Preselection Based on Oral Reading Fluency

A commonly used method to appraise oral reading fluency are running records (Fawson et al., 2006). We chose two child-friendly texts; their difficulty was adamant by the LIX (Lesbarkeitsindex, an index of readability) as a readability measure that was originally developed by Björnsson in 1968 and adjusted for German past Bamberger and Vanecek (1984). The LIX is calculated based on the percentage of long words (more 6 letters) and the average judgement length. For fifth-graders, the text comprised 212 words and had a LIX of 32. For 6th-graders, the text independent 224 words with a LIX of 34. Therefore, the texts were comparable in readability and complexity. Each kid was tested individually in a placidity room in their school. At start, the participants read the text silently, then they read the text aloud, and the oral reading was recorded with a dictating motorcar. Afterward, we calculated words per minute (wpm) that were read correctly. All children read, on average, 111.4 words per infinitesimal (SD = thirty.9). We divided the groups into three subgroups according to their reading speed (slow readers < 100 wpm, average readers between 100 and 125 wpm, and fast readers > 125 wpm).

Heart-Tracking Experiment

In the eye-tracking study, we recorded the data only for wearisome and fast readers. Nosotros did not collect eye-tracking data for the average readers, because we wanted to take a precise distinction in oral reading fluency betwixt the 2 groups (i.e., fast and tedious readers) at both ends of the reading fluency continuum to determine whether there was a differentiation in reading development in this age grouping. There was no pregnant influence of historic period or grade on the oral reading speed.

Consequently, nosotros recorded eye movement data of 66 children in total; 32 were boring readers (10 females, mean age of 11.2 ± 0.9 years) and 34 were fast readers (25 females, mean age of ten.ix ± 0.nine years). The average oral reading speed of the deadening readers was 81.seven wpm (SD = 12.nine) and of the fast readers 139.7 wpm (SD = ix.seven). An unpaired t-examination yielded a pregnant departure in oral reading speed betwixt the 2 groups (t (57.v) = −twenty.6, p < 0.001).

Stimulus Texts

In the eye-tracking experiment, nosotros used 2 passages from the book "Charlie Os and the Time Twister" (2003) by Jenny Nimmo. The text passages are historic period-advisable and suspenseful but non scary. None of the children had read the texts before participating in the study. To select two comparable narrative texts, we pre-analyzed the passages. The first passage included 89 sentences (K = 13.09 words per sentence); i,152 words (1000 = 10.67 per line); and a LIX of 38. The second passage independent 87 sentences (M = 12.44 words); 1,080 words (M = 10.l per line); and a LIX of 39. Both LIX values indicate low difficulty. The word frequency counts are based on the German childLex corpus (Schroeder et al., 2015) that contains annotated children books directly mirroring the participants' literature input. The two texts did not differ in boilerplate word length according to a Welch two-sample t-exam (text ane: Yard = v.17, SD = 2.half dozen, range 2–17 words; text ii: M = v.20, SD = two.lxx, range 2–18 words; t (2212.8) = −0.29, p = 0.77) or word frequency of instance-insensitive log10 type per 1000000 token (text 1: M = 3.47, SD = ane.41; text 2: K = three.45, SD = 1.47; t (2206.viii) = 0.30, p = 0.77).

Word Targets

Similar to previous studies (Kliegl et al., 1983; Hyönä and Olson, 1995; Luncheon-Richards and Schroeder, 2015), nosotros selected 40 capitalized nouns mail service-hoc every bit target words for the word length and frequency analyses. None of these target words were positioned at the offset or end of a sentence to avoid sentence-initiating and wrap-up furnishings (Luncheon-Richards and Schroeder, 2018). We chose short (three to five letters), long (8–eleven messages), high frequency (>2.v log10 type frequency), and depression frequency (<0.8 log10 blazon frequency) words. X of these were long (M = 9.82, SD = 1.08 letters) and highly frequent (Grand = 2.76, SD = 0.35); ten were long (1000 = 10.00, SD = 0.74 messages) and of low frequency (M = 0.10, SD = 0.33); ten words were brusque (K = 4.04, SD = 0.81 letters) and highly frequent (One thousand = three.62, SD = 0.23), and x were brusk (Thou = iv.61, SD = 0.50 letters) and of depression frequency (G = 0.70, SD = 0.84). For each of the iv categories, we selected 5 words from one of the two texts (40 words from each text). The parameters for give-and-take length and frequency were not correlated (r = 0.0521, p = 0.6457).

Process

To record center movements during reading, nosotros used a remote eye-tracking device (SMI RED 250) with a sampling rate of 250 Hz. The mobile tracking device was attached to a 22-inch monitor with a screen resolution of 1920 × 1080 pixels. The participants sabbatum comfortably at a viewing distance of 58 cm in front of the monitor. No caput back up or chin residuum was used. The text was presented in Courier New (font size 36) in a black font against a lite-grayness groundwork using the iViewRED software (Version 4.2.1). The text passages were presented on 10 sequential screens. Each screen contained a maximum of 12 double-spaced lines of text with a maximum of fifteen words and 87 characters per line. In that location were no hyphenated words at line breaks, and we arranged the sentences on the screen such that their endings coincided with line breaks. Each presentation screen was preceded past a fixation cross in the top left-hand corner that triggered the text presentation automatically after ten s of cumulative fixations.

Participants were tested individually in a quiet room at their school. At the get-go of the experimental session, participants were orally instructed by the experimenter to read silently for comprehension at a natural pace. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of the two text passages. At the get-go of the experimental session, the eye-tracker was calibrated by using 9 fixation points on the entire screen. The calibration was repeated until an accuracy of at least 0.v° was achieved. The eye-tracker was recalibrated later on each suspension and when ten- or y-axis drifts appeared. Each screen independent a black dot in the lower right corner. Nosotros told the participants that, by looking at this dot, they could "turn the folio." We had programmed a trigger area around the dot that initiated the presentation of the next screen subsequently thirty s. Later on the participants finished reading the entire text, we asked them to respond to vi comprehension questions on paper. The entire experimental session lasted approximately forty min.

Data Analysis

We imported the eye motion data into BeGaze v3.vii.40 (SMI) and defined areas of involvement (AOIs). Reading and tracking was binocular, merely we used only the right center for information analysis. Each AOI contains ane discussion (including any post-obit punctuation). Every bit eye movement measures, nosotros analyzed first fixation duration (the duration of the very offset fixation in an AOI, if any), gaze duration (the sum of all fixations in an AOI until the eye leaves it in any management, in other words, dwell time) and full reading fourth dimension (the sum of all fixations in the AOI) (Rayner, 1998). First fixations have been demonstrated to reflect the initial (lexical) processing of a word, whereas gaze duration and total reading fourth dimension can mirror postlexical word processing (Just et al., 1982). We excluded all fixations on the black dot in the lower-right corner used to proceed to the adjacent screen (9.ane% of the data). Additionally, we deleted data with residuals three standard deviations above the participants' mean for each of the 3 heart motility measures (Baayen and Milin, 2010). Both procedures eliminated in full 12.three% of all data points.

We used linear-mixed models (lme) to analyze the eye movement information in the R environment version 3.6.0 (R Core Team, 2020) with the lme4 package version 1.i.21 (Bates et al., 2015). We treated participants and AOIs equally crossed random furnishings, and all fixation measures were log-transformed. The factor group (tedious or fast reader) was included equally a betwixt-subjects fixed effect, with word length and frequency equally within-subjects fixed effects. Discussion length and frequency were included as continuous and centered values. The fixation measures were back-transformed from their logarithmic model estimates and are reported in milliseconds. We report regression coefficients relative to the intercept (b), standard errors (SE), and t-values for the lme analyses. Only t-values larger than |2.0| are considered to be pregnant at a p < 0.05 level. Additionally, we report F-tests and p-values in a results table for ANOVA analyses of the lme-models.

Results

Question-Response Accuracy

The question-response accuracy scores that we obtained from the comprehension questions after the text was read were generally loftier for all children. The overall mean scores for fast readers were very high (91%), while slow readers reached an accuracy level of 79%. The difference in accurateness between fast and deadening readers was significant (t = −three.22, p = 0.001).

Center Motility Measures for the Entire Text

We start conducted analyses on all words in the text to generally compare the operation of fast and slow readers during silent reading. Table ane displays the eye motion measures for both groups on all words in the text.

Tabular array 1. Mean showtime fixation duration, gaze duration and total reading time (in milliseconds) on all words in the texts for slow and fast readers (standard deviations in parentheses).

For the entire text, nosotros found, as expected, pregnant differences in (silent) reading speed for fast and slow readers in all centre movement measures: Fast readers exhibited shorter get-go fixation durations (b = −0.149, SE = 0.026, t = −5.670), gaze durations (b = −0.223, SE = 0.027, t = −8.338), and total reading times (b = −0.303, SE = 0.034, t = −8.814) compared to tiresome readers. This overall faster discussion processing indicated by all eye-tracking measures confirms the grouping based on (oral) reading speed in the pre-test.

Target Measures

In the post-obit sections, we present the effects of word length, frequency, and their interaction for fast and slow readers for the selected target words. The dependent middle move measures on the 40 target words are summarized in Table 2 and are indicated in Figure i for each group. Table three contains the F-tests and p-values for all main effects and interactions. Again, we plant a significantly faster reading speed for fast compared to slow readers in all eye movement measures on the target words: Fast readers exhibited shorter first fixation durations (b = −0.133, SE = 0.029, t = −four.516), gaze durations (b = −0.198, SE = 0.031, t = −6.286), and full reading times (b = −0.299, SE = 0.036, t = −8.431) than tedious readers.

TABLE ii. Mean fixation measures (in milliseconds) on the target words for give-and-take frequency and length in both groups (standard deviations in parentheses).

Figure ane. Mean first fixation duration (peak), gaze duration (middle) and total reading time (bottom) (in ms) for brusk and long words of loftier and depression frequency. Groups are represented every bit follows: fast readers in blue on the left, deadening readers in grey on the right.

Table 3. F-tests and p-values for the primary effects and interactions of give-and-take length, frequency and group in three center motion measures (numbers marked in bold bespeak significant effects).

Word Length Furnishings

In get-go fixation elapsing, we found no significant word length furnishings for any of the groups. In gaze duration, we revealed a significant main effect for discussion length (b = 0.087, SE = 0.042, t = ii.062), with long words being read 118 ms longer than short words. In total reading time, we as well observed a primary effect for word length (b = 0.149, SE = 0.025, t = 5.882), with long words being read 172 ms longer than brusk words. Further, nosotros institute a significant interaction of discussion length and group for gaze duration (b = −0.076, SE = 0.032, t = −2.412). Fast readers read long words 112 ms longer than brusk words. Slow readers read long words 137 ms longer than short words and exhibited a stronger word length effect in gaze duration. We as well plant a significant interaction of word length and grouping for total reading fourth dimension (b = −0.099, SE = 0.032, t = −iii.059). Fast readers read long words 166 ms longer than brusque words, whereas slow readers read long words 200 ms longer than short words and again exhibited a stronger word length effect in total reading time. To summarize, all children revealed the expected discussion length effect in gaze duration and full reading time. Additionally, the reading behavior of the groups differed in gaze duration and total reading fourth dimension, with boring readers exhibiting a stronger give-and-take length outcome compared to fast readers.

Word Frequency Effects

In first fixation duration and gaze duration, we found no give-and-take frequency effect, merely in total reading time, we observed a chief effect for word frequency (b = −0.101, SE = 0.021, t = −iv.762). Low frequency words were read 62 ms longer than high frequency words. In summary, nosotros found a reliable word frequency effect only in i eye movement measure, in total reading fourth dimension, and no difference in reading behavior between the two groups.

Discussion Length by Frequency Effects

In this written report, we were mainly interested in the forcefulness of the interaction of the word length and frequency effect in fast- and boring-reading children. We found pregnant three-mode interactions of length, frequency, and group for first fixation duration (b = −0.050, SE = 0.019, t = −ii.655) and total reading time (b = −0.061, SE = 0.021, t = −2.874). We present the results for these ii eye-tracking measures separately for the groups, get-go for fast and so for slow readers.

In start fixation duration for fast readers, we found a significant interaction of word length and frequency (b = −0.034, SE = 0.017, t = −2.002). We observed a significant word frequency effect for long words (b = −0.104, SE = 0.038, t = −2.773, p = 0.013, 45 m) but no effect for short words (b = −0.012, SE = 0.019, t = −0.626, p = 0.541, 16 ms). In total reading time, we plant pregnant principal effects for length (b = 0.099, SE = 0.029, t = 3.411, p = 0.002) and frequency (b = −0.089, SE = 0.023, t = −3.864, p < 0.001) and a significant interaction of discussion length and frequency (b = −0.068, SE = 0.019, t = −3.761, p < 0.001). The interaction revealed a greater word length outcome for low frequency (b = 0.280, SE = 0.037, t = 7.534, p < 0.001, 251 ms) in comparison to high frequency words (b = 0.167, SE = 0.022, t = vii.452, p < 0.001, 129 ms).

For slow readers, we institute less prominent effects. There were no significant interactions of length and frequency, but some principal effects for length or frequency. In first fixation duration, we found no significant effects. In total reading time, we found significant main effects for word length (b = 0.120, SE = 0.029, t = 6.838, p < 0.001, 200 ms) and frequency (b = −0.114, SE = 0.022, t = −five.182, p < 0.001, lxx ms). Over again, we found no interaction of length and frequency, just carve up analyses revealed, that the discussion length effect was greater for low frequency words (b = 0.230, SE = 0.040, t = 5.691, p < 0.001, 260 ms) than for high frequency words (b = 0.234, SE = 0.019, t = 12.271, p < 0.001, 219 ms).

Discussion

In this eye-tracking study, we compared heart movements of normally developing fast- and slow-reading children in German with five to six years of reading experience, using a silent reading task of continued text taken from a published children's volume and age-appropriate give-and-take frequency counts for children. We found that slow readers spend significantly more time on the processing of each word during reading. This has been demonstrated in the analyses of centre motion measures for the unabridged text (see Table one) and for target words (come across Table 3). More specifically, we investigated the furnishings of word length and frequency and plant pregnant effects for fast as well equally for boring readers. In the divide group analyses, nosotros establish a significant interaction of give-and-take length and frequency in showtime fixation elapsing and total reading time only for the fast readers. For irksome readers, we did not find whatever meaning interactions of give-and-take length and frequency. We first hash out the results for word length, and then word frequency and, afterward, the interaction of both factors.

Regarding word length, our results bespeak a consequent issue for fast- and dull-reading children in gaze duration and full reading time. Both groups read long words longer than brusk words. The groups did differ significantly for word length in gaze duration and total reading time (pregnant interaction of word length and group, come across Table 3): Slow readers exhibited a stronger word length outcome than fast readers and were plainly more influenced by word length. This suggests that, for irksome readers, processing relies more than on the nonlexical route than for fast readers, and slow readers' identification of graphemes, syllables, and words might be less efficient. It is likely that ho-hum readers need more time to assemble decoded graphemes and syllables of long words into ane give-and-take and that processes of lexical admission and meaning representation are delayed when compared to the processing speed of fast readers.

Apropos word frequency, we found a main effect in full reading time (see Table three): Depression frequency words received longer fixation durations than high frequency words in both groups. The children revealed this effect only in the belatedly measure out of total reading times and not in any of the earlier eye move measures (beginning fixation duration or gaze duration). The word frequency issue did not differ between the groups. It appears that give-and-take frequency alone cannot explain the unlike reading patterns of the participants in this written report.

The discussion length gene also interacted with discussion frequency in the results. Long and low frequency words were processed the longest past all children. Like to previous findings in eye-tracking with children, nosotros replicated a greater give-and-take length effect for low frequency words compared to loftier frequency words (Hyönä and Olson, 1995; Tiffin-Richards and Schroeder, 2015). Hyönä and Olson (1995) institute this greater discussion length effect in the early eye motility measures of first fixation and gaze duration. Even so, their participants were English-speaking children who read texts aloud while their optics were being tracked. In this study, we used silent reading of connected texts, and so the different reading modality could influence the timing of the upshot here. Tiffin-Richards and Schroeder (2015), who used silent reading of German text, found furnishings quite similar to the ones revealed in our study. Their child participants exhibited longer first fixation durations on short, low frequency words and shorter start fixation durations on long, depression frequency words, which are similar to the wearisome readers in our study. The adult group in their report exhibited the contrary design, with the word frequency effect for low frequency words in first fixation duration, being similar to the fast readers in our study. The significant 3-way interaction for kickoff fixation duration in our written report seems to be driven by this divergence in fixation durations for depression frequency words: Slow readers fixated longer on curt than long low frequency words, while fast readers exhibited the opposite pattern, with longer fixations on long compared to short low frequency words (see Figure 1). All children exhibited like fixation durations for high frequency words. Tiffin-Richards and Schroeder (2015) propose that the children's fixation pattern is due to the higher proportion of multiple fixations past children compared to adults. In other words, children often fixate on words more than one time. A possible caption could be a slower lexical admission of the deadening readers for depression frequency words. They attempted to read the short, low frequency words via direct lexical access and, consequently, fixated on these words for a longer time. Nevertheless, long, low frequency words were likewise long to be processed at beginning sight by boring readers, and they needed more refixations to complete lexical processing; or these words were initially processed but superficially and were revisited afterwards for deeper processing. The fast readers in our study revealed quite developed-like reading behavior already in first fixation duration with a give-and-take length effect for depression frequency words, with results similar to the adults in Tiffin-Richards and Schroeder (2015).

We interpret these results with reference to the DRC (Coltheart et al., 2001). A depression frequency word is encountered less often than a high frequency give-and-take. This means that either 1) the discussion is not all the same represented in the reader'due south orthographic lexicon, since it has never been encountered before, or 2) its activation level is very depression due to the infrequent occurrence. If, during reading, a give-and-take cannot immediately be processed via the fast lexical route and matched onto a mental representation in the orthographic lexicon, word processing is slowed downwardly. In particular, the processing of low frequency words is more than likely to fail via a directly lexical matching, peculiarly for young readers who presumably have a smaller vocabulary size than advanced readers and lack the representation of depression frequency words. Processing fourth dimension increases with give-and-take length via the nonlexical road, considering more than graphemes need to be translated into their respective phonological representation. If, at this stage, no semantic friction match can be constitute to fit the phonological representation, then, equally in the choice of 1) to a higher place, no entry has been stored and thus no pregnant tin be straight retrieved. If, however, based on the phonological representation, lexical access to the discussion grade tin be realized, this process takes longer, as described in the option of 2) above, because the activation level of this significant representation showtime needs to be raised. Additionally, in languages such as German, long, low frequency words may actually be words that are formed according to the morphological principle of composition. This means that, for example, two nouns are "glued" together to form i new, longer, and less frequent word (due east.g., Musik + Genie = Musikgenie, engl. music genius; Mauer + Kronen = Mauerkronen; engl. coping). When reading, it is likely that the two nouns must be recognized individually and their split meanings must be assembled to stand for the full significant of the long word. These two processes presumably have upwards more processing time than the lexical access to a single word. 6 out of the 10 long, low frequency words were formed past composition, while two of the 10 long but frequent words in our report were based on a different morphological principle: derivation. To identify a derived give-and-take during reading, the main carrier of the give-and-take'south meaning must be isolated and recognized while the affix represents the grammatical pregnant of the give-and-take (eastward.thousand., Dunkelheit = dunkel + -heit, engl. darkness; Sicherheit = sicher + -heit, engl. safety). Other examples for long but frequent words (8 out of x) were e.g., Großmutter (engl. grandmother), Schatten (engl. shadow), Geschwister (engl. siblings) and Menschen (engl. humans). We suggest that effects of discussion length in reading, therefore, can exist interpreted either as a reliance on the slower nonlexical route necessary due to a small dictionary size and/or difficulties in word partition, prolonged processes of lexical admission, and boosted assembly of pregnant.

Interestingly, in gaze duration and full reading time, fast readers exhibited a greater word length effect for depression frequency words than slow readers did. This might be explained every bit follows: Fast readers were able to rely on the lexical route to process the high frequency words via direct lexical access (i.east., offset fixation elapsing), merely they could non rely on the lexical road for low frequency word (similar to findings with dyslexic readers by Hawelka et al., 2010). In contrast, slow readers revealed a speed-impaired efficiency in reliance on the lexical road for all target words in our report, irrespective of discussion frequency. This suggests a difference in efficiency of the lexical route for reading from initial reading processes onward. While fast readers demonstrated a better efficiency of bachelor routes and seem to process words more likely via direct lexical access to speed upwardly their reading fluency, slow readers seem to be speed-impaired in their efficiency of the lexical road, similar to dyslexic readers (Hawelka et al., 2010). Furthermore, slow readers seem to take had less time for processing and remembering the content of the text, which was visible in the significant deviation of question-give-and-take-accuracy betwixt groups.

Due to our choice of method and participants, we encountered some challenges that are relevant to time to come inquiry. Kickoff, we recorded our data with an eye-tracking resolution of only 250 Hz, while the usual choice in reading studies would be 1,000 Hz. We decided to utilize this item mobile centre-tracker because nosotros did not want to utilise a chin rest or head support with our young participants, like some of the cited studies in this paper did (Rau et al., 2014; Rau et al., 2015; Tiffin-Richards and Schroeder, 2015). Consequently, the child participants could sit relatively still in a chair in a quite natural situation (their school environment) in front of a reckoner monitor. Nosotros acknowledge that this tracking situation came at the cost of a lower tracking resolution. Second, nosotros decided a priori not to track the average readers, since our interest was mainly in shedding light on the reading patterns of two "extreme" reading fluency groups. Thus, we tracked only tiresome and fast readers based on oral reading fluency in the pre-test. As a reviewer pointed out, we could take nerveless the data of the average readers and analyzed the reading fluency as a continuous value without dividing the groups for comparing. This would have increased the generalizability of our results. We think that this is admittedly a valid signal, and nosotros will strongly consider this in our hereafter research. A tertiary limitation concerns the mail service-hoc selection of our target words. We chose to nowadays the target words in continuous natural texts taken from a published children's book instead of past constructing sentence frames for each of the words. The sentence frames would take provided a more controlled setting without the opportunity for confounding variables, for example, related to complex morphology. However, we chose this reading material to assess the natural reading of children and were still able to find substantial word length and frequency effects in their eye movements. Children could have encountered these texts in everyday life. We rather wanted to assess the patterns of linguistic word properties, such as word length and frequency of our target words, in an unbiased reading setting rather than in an experimental laboratory situation.

In contrast to before center-tracking studies with children (except Tiffin-Richards and Schroeder, 2015), nosotros used age-appropriate frequency counts. Nosotros specifically selected this corpus of German children's books because of spurious results when using discussion frequency counts from developed corpora in eye-tracking studies with children (Joseph and Liversedge, 2013). Our results reveal interactions of discussion length and frequency in 5th- and sixth-graders that are similar to those in the study by Luncheon-Richards and Schroeder (2015), who tested second-graders. However, Rau et al., 2014 exercise not report whatsoever interactions in second-graders in an eye-tracking written report. A possible reason for not finding an interaction in kickoff readers could be that they based their frequency counts on an adult corpus rather than on a children'south corpus. The discrepancy of results in middle-tracking studies highlights the importance of appropriate reading materials in eye-tracking experiments with children based on suitable frequency counts. Apparently, the give-and-take frequency count has a strong touch on on first readers' heart motion measures and, consequently, on the empirical results. Therefore, the word frequency count, should exist based on the reading cloth that children really come across.

Previous eye-tracking research focused generally on comparing the middle movements of children to skilled adults and interpreted the disparities equally stemming from reading evolution. Studies with child participants have often assessed dyslexic children and age-matched control groups to report reading behavior. However, these findings are based on oral reading and not on silent reading, and probably mirror speech communication product difficulties in children. Nosotros need more middle-tracking studies that compare unlike reading modalities in children to uncrease mixed findings. Future research needs to explore the impact of word length and frequency furnishings in outset and slightly more advanced readers. This should be done in relationship to their reading skill, lexicon size, morphological processing skills, and longitudinal developmental differences. Such studies would allow researchers to proceeds further insights into reading development and the timing of early visual and phonological perception processes, lexical admission of word forms and their meanings, and intertwined morphological processes.

Information Availability Statement

The datasets presented in this article are not readily available because the raw data are property of the Academy of Potsdam. Requests to access the datasets should be directed to sabrina.gerth@ph-tirol.ac.at.

Ethics Statement

The studies involving human being participants were reviewed and canonical past Ethics committee of the University of Potsdam. Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by the participants' legal guardian/next of kin.

Writer Contributions

Writer contributions are as follows: substantial contributions to the conception and design of the project (SG, JF); data conquering and analysis (SG), interpretation of data (SG, JF), drafting of the manuscript (SG) and revision of the manuscript (SG, JF).

Funding

This research was supported past Land Brandenburg, the Academy of Potsdam, Germany and State Tirol.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher'due south Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do non necessarily correspond those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may exist evaluated in this commodity, or claim that may be fabricated by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed past the publisher.

Acknowledgments

We thank the children who participated in our report. Further, we are grateful to Sabine Röttig for providing the data of the oral reading task and helping with participant recruitment of the eye-tracking written report. Nosotros also give thanks our technical assistant Sebastian Kuhn for help with the collection and pre-processing of the eye-tracking data.

References

Bamberger, R., and Vanecek, E. (1984). Lesen, verstehen, lernen, schreiben: dice Schwierigkeitsstufen von Texten in deutscher Sprache. Wien: Jugend und Volk.

Bates, D., Mächler, Grand., Bolker, B., and Walker, South. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Usinglme4. J. Stat. Soft. 67 (one), 1–48. doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bergmann, J., and Wimmer, H. (2008). A Dual-Route Perspective on Poor reading in a Regular Orthography: Evidence from Phonological and Orthographic Lexical Decisions. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 25 (5), 653–676. doi:10.1080/02643290802221404

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Blythe, H. I., and Joseph, H. S. South. L. (2011). "Children'southward Centre Movements during reading," in Oxford Handbook on Center Movements (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 643–662. doi:ten.1093/oxfordhb/9780199539789.013.0036

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Coltheart, Thou. (2006). Dual Route and Connectionist Models of reading: an Overview. Lond. Rev. Educ. 4 (one), 5–17. doi:10.1080/13603110600574322

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Coltheart, M., Rastle, Thou., Perry, C., Langdon, R., and Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A Dual Route Cascaded Model of Visual Discussion Recognition and Reading Aloud. Psychol. Rev. 108 (one), 204–256. doi:ten.1037/0033-295x.108.one.204

PubMed Abstruse | CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

De Luca, Thou., Di Pace, East., Judica, A., Spinelli, D., and Zoccolotti, P. (1999). Middle Movement Patterns in Linguistic and Not-linguistic Tasks in Developmental Surface Dyslexia. Neuropsychologia 37 (12), 1407–1420. doi:x.1016/S0028-3932(99)00038-X

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Fawson, P. C., Ludlow, B. C., Reutzel, D. R., Sudweeks, R., and Smith, J. A. (2006). Examining the Reliability of Running Records: Attaining Generalizable Results. J. Educ. Res. 100 (2), 113–126. doi:x.3200/JOER.100.2.113-126

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Frith, U. (1985). Below the Surface of Surface Dyslexia. Surface dyslexia: Neuropsychological and Cognitive Studies of Phonological Reading, 301–330.

Harald Baayen, R., and Milin, P. (2010). Analyzing Reaction Times. Int. J. Psychol. Res. three (ii), 12–28. doi:10.21500/20112084.807

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hasenäcker, J., and Schroeder, Southward. (2017). Syllables and Morphemes in German reading Evolution: Evidence from Second Graders, 4th Graders, and Adults. Appl. Psycholinguist. 38 (three), 733–753. doi:ten.1017/S0142716416000412

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Huestegge, L., Radach, R., Corbic, D., and Huestegge, South. M. (2009). Oculomotor and Linguistic Determinants of reading Development: A Longitudinal Study. Vis. Res. 49, 2948–2959. doi:ten.1016/j.visres.2009.09.012

PubMed Abstruse | CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Hyönä, J., and Olson, R. K. (1995). Middle Fixation Patterns Amid Dyslexic and normal Readers: Effects of Give-and-take Length and Give-and-take Frequency. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 21 (6), 1430–1440. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.21.vi.1430

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Inhoff, A. Westward., and Rayner, K. (1986). Parafoveal Discussion Processing during Centre Fixations in reading: Furnishings of Word Frequency. Percept. Psychophys. 40 (half-dozen), 431–439. doi:ten.3758/BF03208203

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Inhoff, A. Due west., Solomon, M., Radach, R., and Seymour, B. A. (2011). Temporal Dynamics of the Middle-Voice Span and Eye Move Command during Oral reading. J. Cogn. Psychol. 23 (5), 543–558. doi:10.1080/20445911.2011.546782

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Joseph, H. S. S. L., and Liversedge, Southward. P. (2013). Children'due south and Adults' On-Line Processing of Syntactically Ambiguous Sentences during Reading. PLoS One 8 (1), e54141. doi:10.1371/periodical.pone.0054141

PubMed Abstruse | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Just, Yard. A., Carpenter, P. A., and Woolley, J. D. (1982). Paradigms and Processes in reading Comprehension. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 111 (2), 228–238. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.111.ii.228

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Kliegl, R., Grabner, E., Rolfs, M., and Engbert, R. (2004). Length, Frequency, and Predictability Effects of Words on Eye Movements in reading. Eur. J. Cogn. Psychol. 16 (1–ii), 262–284. doi:ten.1080/09541440340000213

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Kliegl, R., Olson, R. M., and Davidson, B. J. (1983). "On Issues of Unconfounding Perceptual and Linguistic communication Processes," in Eye Movements in reading: Perceptual and Language Processes. Editor Chiliad. Rayner (New York: Academic Press), 333–343. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-583680-vii.50024-2

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Kuhn, Grand. R., and Stahl, Southward. A. (2003). Fluency: A Review of Developmental and Remedial Practices. J. Educ. Psychol. 95, 3–21. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.3

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Liversedge, S. P., Rayner, Yard., White, Southward. J., Vergilino-Perez, D., Findlay, J. K., and Kentridge, R. W. (2004). Center Movements when reading Disappearing Text: Is There a gap Outcome in reading?. Vis. Res. 44 (ten), 1013–1024. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2003.12.002

PubMed Abstruse | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mancheva, 50., Reichle, E. D., Lemaire, B., Valdois, Due south., Ecalle, J., and Guérin-Dugué, A. (2015). An Analysis of reading Skill Development Using E-Z Reader. J. Cogn. Psychol. 27 (v), 657–676. doi:ten.1080/20445911.2015.1024255

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

McConkie, Grand. W., Zola, D., Grimes, J., Kerr, P. W., Bryant, N. R., and Wolff, P. 1000. (1991). "Children'south Eye Movements during reading," in Vision and Visual Dyslexia. Editor J. F. Stein (Boston: CRC Press), 251–262.

Google Scholar

R Core Team (2020). R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: http://www.r-projection.org (Accessed March 31, 2021).

Google Scholar

Rau, A. K., Moeller, K., and Landerl, K. (2014). The Transition from Sublexical to Lexical Processing in a Consequent Orthography: An Eye-Tracking Written report. Scientific Stud. Reading 18 (3), 224–233. doi:ten.1080/10888438.2013.857673

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Rau, A. K., Moll, Yard., Snowling, M. J., and Landerl, Grand. (2015). Effects of Orthographic Consistency on Eye Movement Behavior: High german and English Children and Adults Process the Same Words Differently. J. Exp. Kid Psychol. 130, 92–105. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2014.09.012

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Rayner, K. (2009). The 35th Sir Frederick Bartlett Lecture: Eye Movements and Attention in reading, Scene Perception, and Visual Search. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 62 (Issue 8), 1457–1506. doi:ten.1080/17470210902816461

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Reichle, E. D., Liversedge, S. P., Drieghe, D., Blythe, H. I., Joseph, H. S. S. L., White, S. J., et al. (2013). Using East-Z Reader to Examine the Concurrent Evolution of Eye-Motility Control and reading Skill. Develop. Rev. 33 (2), 110–149. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2013.03.001

PubMed Abstruse | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Schroeder, S., Würzner, K.-K., Heister, J., Geyken, A., and Kliegl, R. (2015). childLex-Eine lexikalische Datenbank zur Schriftsprache für Kinder im Deutschen. Psychologische Rundschau 66 (3), 155–165. doi:10.1026/0033-3042/a000275

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Spinelli, D., De Luca, K., Di Filippo, Thousand., Mancini, M., Martelli, K., and Zoccolotti, P. (2005). Length Upshot in Word Naming in Reading: Role of Reading Experience and Reading Deficit in Italian Readers. Develop. Neuropsychol. 27 (2), 217–235. doi:10.1207/s15326942dn2702_2

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Luncheon-Richards, Due south. P., and Schroeder, S. (2018). The Development of Wrap-Up Processes in Text reading: A Study of Children's Heart Movements. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 44 (7), 1051–1063. doi:ten.1037/xlm0000506

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Tiffin-Richards, S. P., and Schroeder, S. (2015). Word Length and Frequency Effects on Children's Middle Movements during Silent reading. Vis. Res. 113 (PA), 33–43. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2015.05.008

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Verhoeven, 50., van Leeuwe, J., and Vermeer, A. (2011). Vocabulary Growth and reading Development across the Elementary School Years. Scientific Stud. Reading 15 (1), eight–25. doi:10.1080/10888438.2011.536125

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Yap, M. J., Balota, D. A., Sibley, D. E., and Ratcliff, R. (2012). Individual Differences in Visual Word Recognition: Insights from the English Lexicon Project. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 38 (1), 53–79. doi:10.1037/a0024177

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ziegler, J. C., and Goswami, U. (2005). Reading Conquering, Developmental Dyslexia, and Skilled Reading across Languages: A Psycholinguistic Grain Size Theory. Psychol. Bull. 131 (1), iii–29. doi:x.1037/0033-2909.131.ane.3

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

amosgreeir.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcomm.2021.743113/full

Share this post