↓ Skip to main content

Effects of parafoveal word length and orthographic features on initial fixation landing positions in reading

Overview of attention for article published in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
Effects of parafoveal word length and orthographic features on initial fixation landing positions in reading
Published in
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, March 2012
DOI 10.3758/s13414-012-0286-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patrick Plummer, Keith Rayner

Abstract

Previous research has demonstrated that readers use word length and word boundary information in targeting saccades into upcoming words while reading. Previous studies have also revealed that the initial landing positions for fixations on words are affected by parafoveal processing. In the present study, we examined the effects of word length and orthographic legality on targeting saccades into parafoveal words. Long (8-9 letters) and short (4-5 letters) target words, which were matched on lexical frequency and initial letter trigram, were paired and embedded into identical sentence frames. The gaze-contingent boundary paradigm (Rayner, 1975) was used to manipulate the parafoveal information available to the reader before direct fixation on the target word. The parafoveal preview was either identical to the target word or was a visually similar nonword. The nonword previews contained orthographically legal or orthographically illegal initial letters. The results showed that orthographic preprocessing of the word to the right of fixation affected eye movement targeting, regardless of word length. Additionally, the lexical status of an upcoming saccade target in the parafovea generally did not influence preprocessing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Romania 1 2%
Unknown 57 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 22%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Professor 4 7%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 6 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 23 39%
Linguistics 12 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 8 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 September 2016.
All research outputs
#14,281,005
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#573
of 1,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,835
of 158,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#5
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 158,875 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.