Suppr超能文献

语言加工并不胜过视动限制,但它们可以调节眼球运动的位置,而不考虑单词边界:阅读过程中自上而下的基于单词的眼动控制的证据被否定。

Linguistic processes do not beat visuo-motor constraints, but they modulate where the eyes move regardless of word boundaries: Evidence against top-down word-based eye-movement control during reading.

机构信息

Université Côte d'Azur, CNRS, BCL (Bases, Corpus, Langage), Nice, France.

Lab by MANTU, Amaris Research Unit, Biot, France.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2019 Jul 22;14(7):e0219666. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219666. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

Where readers move their eyes, while proceeding forward along lines of text, has long been assumed to be determined in a top-down word-based manner. According to this classical view, readers of alphabetic languages would invariably program their saccades towards the center of peripheral target words, as selected based on the (expected) needs of ongoing (word-identification) processing, and the variability in within-word landing positions would exclusively result from systematic and random errors. Here we put this predominant hypothesis to a strong test by estimating the respective influences of language-related variables (word frequency and word predictability) and lower-level visuo-motor factors (word length and saccadic launch-site distance to the beginning of words) on both word-skipping likelihood and within-word landing positions. Our eye-movement data were collected while forty participants read 316 pairs of sentences, that differed only by one word, the prime; this was either semantically related or unrelated to a following test word of variable frequency and length. We found that low-level visuo-motor variables largely predominated in determining which word would be fixated next, and where in a word the eye would land. In comparison, language-related variables only had tiny influences. Yet, linguistic variables affected both the likelihood of word skipping and within-word initial landing positions, all depending on the words' length and how far on average the eye landed from the word boundaries, but pending the word could benefit from peripheral preview. These findings provide a strong case against the predominant word-based account of eye-movement guidance during reading, by showing that saccades are primarily driven by low-level visuo-motor processes, regardless of word boundaries, while being overall subject to subtle, one-off, language-based modulations. Our results also suggest that overall distributions of saccades' landing positions, instead of truncated within-word landing-site distributions, should be used for a better understanding of eye-movement guidance during reading.

摘要

读者在阅读文本时眼球的运动轨迹,长期以来一直被认为是自上而下地基于单词的方式决定的。根据这一经典观点,阅读拼音文字的读者总是会将扫视轨迹规划到外围目标单词的中心,这是基于(预期的)正在进行的(单词识别)处理的需要,并且单词内的注视点位置的可变性仅源自系统和随机误差。在这里,我们通过估计语言相关变量(词频和词可预测性)和较低层次的视动因素(词长和扫视起始点到单词起始位置的距离)对单词跳跃的可能性和单词内注视点位置的各自影响,对这一占主导地位的假设进行了严格的检验。我们的眼动数据是在 40 名参与者阅读 316 对句子时收集的,这些句子仅在一个单词上有所不同,这个词是关键词,它与一个后续的测试词在频率和长度上都不同。我们发现,低层次的视动变量在很大程度上决定了下一个将要注视的单词,以及眼球在单词内的注视位置。相比之下,语言相关的变量只对单词跳跃的可能性和单词内初始注视位置有微小的影响。然而,语言变量会影响单词跳跃的可能性和单词内的初始注视位置,这取决于单词的长度以及眼球平均落在单词边界之外的距离,但前提是该单词可以从周边预视中受益。这些发现强烈反对阅读过程中眼球运动指导的主要基于单词的解释,表明扫视主要是由低层次的视动过程驱动的,而不考虑单词边界,同时总体上受到微妙的、一次性的、基于语言的调节。我们的结果还表明,应该使用扫视的整体着陆位置分布,而不是截断的单词内着陆位置分布,来更好地理解阅读过程中的眼球运动指导。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验