Repeated previews elicit an inhibitory parafoveal-on-foveal effect in Chinese reading: Implications for attention allocation.

IF 2.1 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY
Zhiting Yin, Shuyuan Chen, Ni Wen, Bingsong Zhao, Zhican He, Yanping Liu
{"title":"Repeated previews elicit an inhibitory parafoveal-on-foveal effect in Chinese reading: Implications for attention allocation.","authors":"Zhiting Yin, Shuyuan Chen, Ni Wen, Bingsong Zhao, Zhican He, Yanping Liu","doi":"10.1037/xlm0001471","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The allocation of attention during reading has long been a central focus of research. A key question concerns the extent to which lexical processing is influenced solely by the difficulty of currently fixated words, as proposed by the serial attention hypothesis, or whether it is also influenced by the difficulty of upcoming words (i.e., parafoveal-on-foveal effects [PoF effects]), as proposed by the attention gradient hypothesis. The present study provides oculomotor and neural evidence for how mislocated fixation can influence PoF effects in Chinese reading. We manipulated preview words following the target words (repeated vs. original) and categorized the two-character target words into two fixation position groups (Character 1: no fixation error group vs. Character 2: potential mislocated fixations group). Experiment 1 used an eye-tracking technique, and Experiment 2 coregistered electroencephalogram and eye tracking with a larger character size to validate the findings. Overall, the results indicated that inhibitory repeated PoF effects were observed only at Character 2, as evidenced by fixation durations and fixation-related potentials. These findings provide novel eye-movement and neural evidence suggesting that inhibitory repeated PoF effects may, at least in part, be related to mislocated fixations caused by fixations on posttarget words that are mistakenly recorded as being at the end of target words due to measurement (or saccade) errors, while attention remains focused on repeated preview. Taken together, these findings suggest that the mislocated fixation account, situated within the serial attention hypothesis, provides a viable explanation for interpreting the PoF effect without requiring parallel processing. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":50194,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001471","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The allocation of attention during reading has long been a central focus of research. A key question concerns the extent to which lexical processing is influenced solely by the difficulty of currently fixated words, as proposed by the serial attention hypothesis, or whether it is also influenced by the difficulty of upcoming words (i.e., parafoveal-on-foveal effects [PoF effects]), as proposed by the attention gradient hypothesis. The present study provides oculomotor and neural evidence for how mislocated fixation can influence PoF effects in Chinese reading. We manipulated preview words following the target words (repeated vs. original) and categorized the two-character target words into two fixation position groups (Character 1: no fixation error group vs. Character 2: potential mislocated fixations group). Experiment 1 used an eye-tracking technique, and Experiment 2 coregistered electroencephalogram and eye tracking with a larger character size to validate the findings. Overall, the results indicated that inhibitory repeated PoF effects were observed only at Character 2, as evidenced by fixation durations and fixation-related potentials. These findings provide novel eye-movement and neural evidence suggesting that inhibitory repeated PoF effects may, at least in part, be related to mislocated fixations caused by fixations on posttarget words that are mistakenly recorded as being at the end of target words due to measurement (or saccade) errors, while attention remains focused on repeated preview. Taken together, these findings suggest that the mislocated fixation account, situated within the serial attention hypothesis, provides a viable explanation for interpreting the PoF effect without requiring parallel processing. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

在中文阅读中,重复预览会引起抑制中央凹对中央凹效应:对注意分配的影响。
阅读过程中注意力的分配一直是研究的焦点。一个关键的问题是,词汇加工在多大程度上仅仅受到当前固定单词的难度的影响,如连续注意假说所提出的那样,或者是否也受到即将到来的单词的难度的影响(即,如注意梯度假说所提出的,中央凹-中央凹效应[PoF效应])。本研究提供了眼动学和神经学的证据,证明错位注视如何影响汉语阅读中的PoF效应。我们在目标词之后操作预览词(重复和原始),并将两个字符的目标词分为两个注视位置组(字符1:无注视错误组和字符2:潜在注视错误组)。实验1采用眼动追踪技术,实验2用更大的字数共同注册脑电图和眼动追踪来验证研究结果。总的来说,研究结果表明,只有在特征2时才观察到抑制重复PoF效应,这一点可以通过注视时间和注视相关电位来证明。这些发现提供了新的眼动和神经证据,表明抑制重复PoF效应可能(至少在一定程度上)与错误的注视有关:由于测量(或扫视)错误,当注意力仍然集中在重复的预览上时,对后目标词的注视被错误地记录为目标词的结尾。综上所述,这些发现表明,定位错误的固定解释,位于序列注意假说中,为解释PoF效应提供了一个可行的解释,而不需要并行处理。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
3.80%
发文量
163
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition publishes studies on perception, control of action, perceptual aspects of language processing, and related cognitive processes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信