Parafoveal processing of the second constituent of compound words in Finnish Raymond Bertram 1, Sarah White 2, Jukka Hyönä 1 AMLaP 2006, 31.8.2006, 09:20.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Neighbour priming in eye movements during reading Kevin Paterson University of Leicester Samantha McCormick Royal Holloway, University of London Colin.
Advertisements

Identifying the beast in my breast: More evidence for the influence of inter-word lexical priming on eye movements during reading Kevin Paterson University.
> Main questions of the study: (1)Are there global differences in reading speed and accuracy between dyslexics and controls across.
Timing of the brain events underlying access to consciousness during the attentional blink Claire Sergent, Sylvain Baillet, & Stanislas Dehaene.
Marslen-Wilson Big Question: “What processes take place during the period that the sensory information is accumulating for the listener” during spoken.
Eye Movements and Spoken Language Comprehension: effects of visual context on syntactic ambiguity resolution Spivey et al. (2002) Psych 526 Eun-Kyung Lee.
Evaluating the Effect of Neighborhood Size on Chinese Word Naming and Lexical Decision Meng-Feng Li 1, Jei-Tun WU 1*, Wei-Chun Lin 1 and Fu-Ling Yang 1.
Visual Attention Attention is the ability to select objects of interest from the surrounding environment A reliable measure of attention is eye movement.
Readers routinely represent implied object rotation: The role of visual experience Wassenberg & Zwaan, in press, QJEP Brennan Payne Psych
Processing Multiple Unrelated Meanings versus Multiple Related Senses Ekaterini Klepousniotou McGill University.
9/22/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Semantic Priming (Phenomenon & Tool)...armkitchentree Related prime >doctoractor < Unrelated prime nurse floor...
Introduction Complex words may be either (a) stored as full forms in the mental lexicon, or (b) undergo decomposition into their constituent morphemes.
Background Dissociation: ◦ Lexical-gender (king) - recovered directly from the lexicon ◦ Stereotypical-gender (minister) – inferred from pragmatic information.
Parafoveal Processing Influences Word Frequency & Predictability Effects on Eye Movements during Reading University of Glasgow (est. 1451) Glasgow Language.
OCULOMOTOR CAPTURE BY IRRELEVANT LTM. Devue, Belopolsky, and Theeuwes, 2012 Examined whether or not oculomotor capture can occur in a bottom-up fashion.
PS: Introduction to Psycholinguistics Winter Term 2005/06 Instructor: Daniel Wiechmann Office hours: Mon 2-3 pm Phone:
The Timecourse of Morphological Processing: Base and surface frequency effects in speed-accuracy tradeoff designs Jennifer Vannest University of Michigan.
Image Retrieval Using Eye Movements Fred Stentiford & Wole Oyekoya University College London.
Compound elicitation in Finnish: the case of writing Bertram, R. Toennessen, F., Strömqvist, S. Hyönä, J. and Niemi, P. Poster presentation during the.
Word Retrieval in a Stem Completion Task: Influence of Number of Potential Responses Christine Chiarello 1, Laura K. Halderman 1, Cathy S. Robinson 1 &
Influence of Word Class Proportion on Cerebral Asymmetries for High and Low Imagery Words Christine Chiarello 1, Connie Shears 2, Stella Liu 3, and Natalie.
An eye-tracking study of multiply complex Dutch compounds: Preliminary results Victor Kuperman, Rob Schreuder, Harald Baayen Radboud University Nijmegen,
Skim Reading: An Adaptive Strategy for Reading on the Web Gemma Fitzsimmons, Mark J Weal and Denis Drieghe.
The time-course of prediction in incremental sentence processing: Evidence from anticipatory eye movements Yuki Kamide, Gerry T.M. Altman, and Sarah L.
Introduction To know how perceptual and attentional processes and properties of words guide the eyes through a sentence, the following issues are particularly.
Studying Visual Attention with the Visual Search Paradigm Marc Pomplun Department of Computer Science University of Massachusetts at Boston
English versus French: Determinants of eye movement control in reading Sébastien Miellet, Cyril Pernet, Patrick J. O’Donnell, and Sara C. Sereno Department.
Experimental study of morphological priming: evidence from Russian verbal inflection Tatiana Svistunova Elizaveta Gazeeva Tatiana Chernigovskaya St. Petersburg.
Visual Word Form Recognition: An MEG study using Masked Priming Heejeong Ko 1, Michael Wagner 1, Linnaea Stockall 1, Sid Kouider 2, Alec Marantz 1 1 Department.
English vs. French: Determinants of Eye Movement Control in Reading Sébastien Miellet, Cyril Pernet, Patrick J. O’Donnell, and Sara C. Sereno Department.
Lexicon Organization: How are words stored? Atomist view  Words are stored in their full inflected form  talk –> talk  talked –> talked  toothbrush.
Parafoveal Processing of Vowel Contexts: Evidence from Eye Movements Jane Ashby 1, Rebecca Treiman 2, Brett Kessler 2, & Keith Rayner 1 1 University of.
As expected, a large N400 effect was observed for all 3 word types in both experiments, |ts|≥7.69, ps
Information Processing Assumptions Measuring the real-time stages General theory –structures –control processes Representation –definition –content vs.
Lecture 4 – Attention 1 Three questions: What is attention? Are there different types of attention? What can we do with attention that we cannot do without.
Stem Homograph Inhibition and Stem Allomorphy: Representing and Processing Inflected Forms in a Multilevel Lexical System, 1999 & Morphological Parsing.
26 ms 9 ms. Low High Predictability 7-9 Low High Predictability 4-6 Low High Predictability 1-3 Launch Distance from Target (# letters)
The effects of working memory load on negative priming in an N-back task Ewald Neumann Brain-Inspired Cognitive Systems (BICS) July, 2010.
On the Failure to Detect Changes in Scenes Across Brief Interruptions Professor: Liu Student: Ruby.
Investigating the combined effects of word frequency and contextual predictability on eye movements during reading Christopher J. Hand Glasgow Language.
Visual Search Deficits in Williams Buren Syndrome Montfoort, I., Frens, M.A., Lagers- Van Haselen, G.C., & van der Geest, J.N.
Introduction Can you read the following paragraph? Can we derive meaning from words even if they are distorted by intermixing words with numbers? Perea,
Repetition blindness for novel objects 作 者: Veronika Cotheart et al. 報告者:李正彥 日 期: 2006/3/30.
COGNITIVE MORPHOLOGY Laura Westmaas November 24, 2009.
 Example: seeing a bird that is singing in a tree or miss a road sign in plain sight  Cell phone use while driving reduces attention and memory for.
Neural correlates of morphological decomposition in a morphologically rich language : An fMRI study Lehtonen, M., Vorobyev, V.A., Hugdahl, K., Tuokkola.
Optimal Eye Movement Strategies In Visual Search.
48 Item Sets (Only the results for the relative clause versions are reported here.) The professor (who was) confronted by the student was not ready for.
Tonal Violations Interact with Lexical Processing: Evidence from Cross-modal Priming Meagan E. Curtis 1 and Jamshed J. Bharucha 2 1 Dept. of Psych. & Brain.
Early Time Course Hemisphere Differences in Phonological & Orthographic Processes Laura K. Halderman 1, Christine Chiarello 1 & Natalie Kacinik 2 1 University.
48 Item Sets (Only the results for the relative clause versions are reported here.) The professor (who was) confronted by the student was not ready for.
Models of Production and Comprehension [1] Ling4-437.
Innovative Approaches to Displaying Words -- The effect of segmentation on word identification Yu-Chi Tai, Shun-nan Yang, John R. Hayes, & James Sheedy.
VISUAL WORD RECOGNITION. What is Word Recognition? Features, letters & word interactions Interactive Activation Model Lexical and Sublexical Approach.
English vs. French: Determinants of Eye Movement Control in Reading Sébastien Miellet, Cyril Pernet, Patrick J. O’Donnell, and Sara C. Sereno Department.
What can eye tracking tell us about reading, writing, and dyslexia?
Reading, Processing and Interacting with Hypertext on the Web
Investigating the combined effects of word frequency and contextual predictability on eye movements during reading Christopher J. Hand Glasgow Language.
Gemma Fitzsimmons, Mark J Weal and Denis Drieghe
Assist. Prof. Dr. Ilmiye Seçer Fall
Parafoveal processing influences word frequency and predictability effects on eye movements during reading Christopher J. Hand Glasgow Language Processing.
The Effect of Inter-letter Spacing on Reading Yu-Chi Tai, PhD James E
Binocular Advantages in Reading
Department of Psychology, University of Glasgow
English vs. French: Determinants of Eye Movement Control in Reading
Department of Psychology, University of Glasgow
Department of Psychology, University of Glasgow
English vs. French: Determinants of Eye Movement Control in Reading
Department of Psychology, University of Glasgow
English vs. French: Determinants of Eye Movement Control in Reading
Presentation transcript:

Parafoveal processing of the second constituent of compound words in Finnish Raymond Bertram 1, Sarah White 2, Jukka Hyönä 1 AMLaP 2006, , 09: :40 Oral session 4: Morphology 12

Compound words LASTEN/TARHAN/OPETTAJA/KOULUTUS ‘kindergarten teacher schooling’ VANILJA/KASTIKE ‘vanilla sauce’ SIVU/OVI ‘side-door’

Perceptual span attention > periphery parafovea: poor acuity 4 0 fovea: good acuity 2 0 Effective visual field in reading

Parafoveal processing: 2 critical issues 1.Do we extract semantic information from theparafovea? Heated debate going on about this issue, most evidence speaks against it (see Rayner et al., 2003, for a review) 2.Are parafoveal words processed in parallel with fixated words? Serial models (e.g. EZ-Reader, Reichle et al., 2003) Processing Word N before Word N+1, although Word N+1 can be partly processed while on Word N (in later phase) Parallel models (e.g., SWIFT, Engbert, Longtin, Kliegl, 2002) Processing Word N + Word N+1 simultaneously Word N Word N+1

Bertram & Hyönä, JML, 2003, found that access of long compound starts off with access of 1st constituent, purely because of visual acuity reasons 1 vanilja/kastike Effective visual field & compound words ’vanilla sauce’ Hyönä, Bertram, Pollatsek (MC, 2004) found that, nevertheless, orthographic information is extracted from 2nd constituent while fixating the 1st constituent

Current study 1.Do we extract semantic information from theparafovea in compounds like vaniljakastike? => would imply that extracting information from parafovea is not only an acuity issue, but also linguistically determined 2.Are parafoveal constituents/lexemes processed in parallel with fixated constituents/lexemes? => across words more evidence for serial processing => does this extend to within-word processes?

vaniljaseoklii kastike Identical condition: 2nd constituent same throughout Change condition: 2nd constituent changes after saccade over invisible boundary 1 2 vanilja 1 2 Current study: boundary XP, 4 conditions

1. Identical: vanilja/kastike’vanilla sauce’ 2. SemRelated: vanilja/sinappi ’vanilla mustard’ 3. SemUnrelated:vanilja/rovasti ’vanilla priest’ 4. Nonword:vanilja/seoklii ’vanilla nonword’ 1.Do we extract semantic information from the parafovea in compounds like vaniljakastike?  2 < 3, 4 2. Are parafoveal constituents/lexemes processed in parallel with fixated constituents/lexemes? => Parafoveal-on-foveal effects

vanilja/sinappi First Fixation Duration = Subgaze1 = + :gaze duration before boundary change Subgaze2 = : gaze duration after boundary change Early measure Late measure First fixation duration on 2nd constituent = 3 Time course of long compound processing 2. Are parafoveal constituents/lexemes processed in parallel with fixated constituents/lexemes? => Parafoveal-on- foveal effects vanilja/kastike

Method 1. Identical: vanilja/kastike’vanilla sauce’ 2. SemRelated: vanilja/sinappi ’vanilla mustard’ 3. SemUnrelated:vanilja/rovasti ’vanilla priest’ 4. Nonword:vanilja/seoklii ’vanilla nonword’ Semantically related: Lauran mielestä vaniljasinappi kuuluu... Lauran mielestä vaniljakastike kuuluu... To Laura’s mind vanilla sauce belongs...

Earliest measure: First Fixation Duration No difference between 4 conditions (F1,2 < 1). vanilja/kastike

Early measure: SubGaze1 No difference between 4 conditions (ps >.15). vanilja/kastike

Visual- Orthographic Effect Early late measure: First fixation duration on 2nd constituent Main effect, p1,2 <.001 Identical vs other 3 conditions (all ps <.001) vanilja/kastike

Visual- Orthographic Effect Lexical- Semantic Effect Late measure: SubGaze2 Main effect, p1,2 <.001 Identical vs other 3 conditions, all ps <.001 Other contrasts: 2-4 ps <.001; 2-3 and 3-4, ps < vanilja/kastike

Conclusions

Parafoveal processing: 2 critical issues (1) 1.Do we extract semantic information from parafovea? If parafoveal area is 2nd constituent of a compound, the answer is yes! => While fixating on 1st constituent 1(vanilja), semantic information of 2nd constituent is extracted, leading to faster processing in the late stages of compound processing (after crossing constituent boundary)

Parafoveal processing: 2 critical issues (2) 2.Are parafoveal words/lexemes processed in parallel with fixated words No! All effects were found in late measures, nothing on first constituent. In other words, there were no parafoveal-on-foveal effects => Initial processing pertains to processing of 1st constituent.

Time course of long compound processing => preview of 2nd constituent; information of 2nd constituent extracted, from orthographic to semantic vanilja/kastike 1 => Access 1st constituent: vanilja vanilja/kastike 1 2 => access of 2nd constituent; ortho- graphic preview benefits cashed in vanilja/kastike 345 => Semantic preview benefit cashed in; meaning integration of constituents

Implications for eye movement control models Semantic preview benefit within compound words contrasts with parafoveal processing across words => extracting parafoveal information is not only question of visual acuity => linguistic relationship between lexical units important as well! Lack of parafoveal-on-foveal effects in line with models of serial processing, e.g. EZ-Reader. => Attention shifts to next word/lexeme after currently fixated word/lexeme has been accessed

Kiitos!

Boundary experiment with 4 conditions 1. Identical: vanilja/kastike ’vanilla sauce’ 2. Semantically related: vanilja/sinappi ’vanilla mustard’ 3. Semantically unrelated: vanilja/rovasti ’vanilla priest’ 4. Pronounceable nonword:vanilja/seoklii ’vanilla nonword’ 1,2,3,4 matched on 1st/2nd constituent length (average 7.5/5.4) 2,3,4 on visual-orthographic overlap with 1; 1,2,3 on 2nd constituent frequency (around 200 per million); 1 vs 2 and 2 vs 3 pretested on semantic relatedness (scale 1-7) => 1 vs 2: 5.82 vs 3: 1.4

Semantically related: Lauran mielestä vanilja/sinappi kuuluu... Semantically related: Lauran mielestä vanilja/kastike kuuluu... In order to minimise the possibility of participants consciously noticing display change => boundary located prior to the ultimate letter of the first constituent. Participants were only included in the analyses if they reported to have noticed no more than five changes Method

Latin square design 28 sentences were filler items without display change 4 lists of 84 sentences were constructed (56 targets + 28 fillers) 50% items without display change (14 identical + 28 fillers) 7 participants were randomly allocated to each list Participants asked to read for comprehension Comprehension question after 18 of the 84 sentences Eye movements monitored by EyeLink 2 Method

Size of parafoveal preview benefit (Identical – Preview Type) VisuallyVisuallyFirst 2-3First 2-3First 2-3 DissimilarSimilarIdenticalIdenticalIdentical Study All Xs LettersLetters+Rest XsRest Vis.Rest Vis. DissimilarSimilar Balota et al Rayner et al Lima, 1987, XP Lima, 1987 XP Inhoff, 1989a, XP Inhoff, 1989a, XP Inhoff, 1989b, XP Inhoff, 1989b, XP Inhoff, 1989b, XP Henderson & Ferreira, 1990, XP1+5-6 Henderson & Ferreira, 1990, XP Pollatsek et al., Briihl & Inhoff, 1995, XP1+38 Briihl & Inhoff, 1995, XP Kennison & Clifton, Inhoff et al., Altarriba et al. (2001) Mean

The effect is much larger than any preview benefit effect before Further conclusions => attention spreads more to the parafovea within a compound word than across two subsequent words! vanilja/kaefhla vanilja/kastike 101 ms Hyönä et al, 2004 new doornew tunenew sorp new songnew songnew song 44ms 40 ms 5 ms Rayner, Balota, Pollatsek, 1986 Change: NoChange:

Implications for processing models At least for one type of words, we can say: Yes => before whole-word units, c1 before c2 Morphological processing models Are morphemic units used in the course of processing? If so, how/when? Whole word access Morphemic access VANILJA_KASTIKE C1C2 Int C1C2

Method Hyönä et al. 1)Boundary that determined display change was always the constituent boundary. 2)The first two letters of the 2 nd constituent were preserved in the change condition and all the other letters were changed to visually similar letters). 3)This was done so that display change was not noticed and to create a visual-orthographic condition that was quite similar to the no change condition

Studying processing of compound words in context using online measures of eye movement behavior More detailed insight in the role of morphology during complex word processing => Morphological processing models Specification of eye movement behavior as a function of morphological structure => General eye movement models of reading Compound words & processing models

Morphological processing models Are morphemic units used in the course of processing? If so, how/when? Whole word access SIVU_OVI Morphemic access VANILJA_KASTIKE

brilliant We do extract information from word N+1, while we are fixating on word N => Parafoveal preview benefits The information we extract is low-level information (pertaining to word length and orthographic/phonological level) We process words in a serial manner: first word N, than word N+1 => We do not find effects on word N as a function of manipulations of word N+1 => No parafoveal-on-foveal effects (cf EZ-READER, Reichle et al., 2003) Parafoveal processing across words WORD N WORD N+1 tunesongsorp song Rayner, Balota, Pollatsek, 1986

Compound words & processing models General eye movement models of reading How do foveal and parafoveal processes interact? John Smith is a great groundskeeper.

b. Hyönä et al. (2004) also tested whether readers extract orthographic information from the latter part of the 2nd consti- tuent, at the same time as they process the 1st constituent. No change condition: v a n i l j a k a s t i k e Change condition:v a n i l j a k a e f l h a Effective visual field & compound words 1234  If you extract orthographic information from kastike at the same time as you process the first constituent, the change manipulation should affect processing behavior on early measures already => parafoveal-on-foveal effects

Gaze Duration whole word= vanilja/kaeflha vanilja/kastike First Fixation Duration = Subgaze1 = + :gaze duration before boundary change Subgaze2 = : gaze duration after boundary change Early measure Late measure Global measure

Major Findings Hyönä et al.  Change effect, but in later measures only Measure NoChange (kastike) Change (kaeflha) Change Effect 1st Fixation duration Subgaze Subgaze ** Gaze Duration ** 1 vanilja/kaeflha vanilja/kastike

 Orthographic information of latter part of second constituent is picked up during first fixation(s).  However, the fact that the change effects are late suggests that processing of the two constituents is serial (in line with e.g. EZ-Reader)  First constituent frequency manipulation in this experiment yielded solid effects from the first fixation onwards Conclusions

With more attention spreading to parafovea, semantic parafoveal processing may take place within compounds Visual-orthographic manipulations in Hyönä et al. were subtle => parallel processing may take place (e.g., processing 1st constituent and first letters of 2nd constituent at the same time), but stronger visual-orthographic manipulations are called for than in case of k a s t í k e vs. k a e f l h a Current study: boundary XP, 4 conditions 1. Identical: vanilja/kastike’vanilla sauce’ 2. SemRelated: vanilja/sinappi ’vanilla mustard’ 3. SemUnrelated:vanilja/rovasti ’vanilla priest’ 4. Nonword:vanilja/seoklii ’vanilla nonword’

Current study: boundary XP, 4 conditions 1. Identical: vanilja/kastike’vanilla sauce’ 2. SemRelated: vanilja/sinappi ’vanilla mustard’ 3. SemUnrelated:vanilja/rovasti ’vanilla priest’ 4. Nonword:vanilja/seoklii ’vanilla nonword’ 1.Do we extract semantic information from the parafovea in compounds like vaniljakastike?  2 < 3, 4 1b.Do we extract orthographic information from the parafovea in compounds like vaniljakastike?  1 < 2, 3, 4

LASTEN_TARHAN_OPETTAJA_KOULUTUS Bertram & Hyönä, JML, 2003 => Visual Acuity Hypothesis: access of long compound starts off with access of 1st constituent due to visual acuity benefit of 1st constituent over the latter part of the word. Effective visual field & compound words 11 sivu/ovi 2 vanilja/kastike