Biomedical subjects

Erik D Reichle

Publications and source records attributed to Erik D Reichle.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Using reinforcement learning to understand the emergence of "intelligent" eye-movement behavior during reading.

The eye movements of skilled readers are typically very regular (K. Rayner, 1998). This regularity may arise as a result of the perceptual, cognitive, and motor limitations of the reader (e.g., limited visual acuity) and the inherent constraints of the task (e.g., identifying the words in their correct order). To examine this hypothesis, reinforcement learning was used to allow an artificial "agent" to learn to move its eyes to read as efficiently as possible. The resulting patterns of simulated eye movements resembled those of skilled readers and suggest that important aspects of eye-movement behavior might emerge as a consequence of satisfying the constraints that are imposed on readers. These results also suggest novel interpretations of some contentious empirical results, such as the fixation duration costs associated with word skipping (R. Kliegl & R. Engbert, 2005), and theoretical assumptions, for example the familiarity check in the E-Z Reader model of eye-movement control (E. D. Reichle, A. Pollatsek, D. L. Fisher, & K. Rayner, 1998).

Algorithms↗

PubMed2006

Serial processing is consistent with the time course of linguistic information extraction from consecutive words during eye fixations in reading: a response to Inhoff, Eiter, and Radach (2005).

A. W. Inhoff, B. M. Eiter, and R. Radach reported the results of 2 experiments that they claimed were problematic for serial attention models of eye movements in reading (such as the E-Z Reader model). In this reply, the authors demonstrate via argumentation and simulations that their data pose no serious problem for the E-Z Reader model or serial attention models in general.

Attention↗

PubMed2006

Attention to one word at a time in reading is still a viable hypothesis: rejoinder to Inhoff, Radach, and Eiter (2006).

A. W. Inhoff, R. Radach, and B. Eiter argue that the current version of the E-Z Reader model (A. Pollatsek, E. D. Reichle, & K. Rayner) cannot explain 2 key findings in their data, and as a result, the assumption of words being attended to 1 at a time is likely to be false. In this rejoinder, the authors argue that the E-Z Reader model can easily explain the 1st of the 2 phenomena and that the 2nd phenomenon is likely to be at least partially an artifact of changing displays during fixations. The authors also argue that their assumptions about attention shifting are not contrary to the attention literature and that the assumption that A. W. Inhoff et al. deem to be unrealistic (i.e., instantaneous shifting of attention) is easily modified within the architecture of the model.

Attention↗

PubMed2006

The effect of word frequency, word predictability, and font difficulty on the eye movements of young and older readers.

Young adult and older readers' eye movements were recorded as they read sentences containing target words that varied in frequency or predictability. In addition, half of the sentences were printed in a font that was easy to read (Times New Roman) and the other half were printed in a font that was more difficult to read (Old English). Word frequency, word predictability, and font difficulty effects were apparent in the eye movement data of both groups of readers. In the fixation time data, the pattern of results was the same, but the older readers had larger frequency and predictability effects than the younger readers. The older readers skipped words more often than the younger readers (as indicated by their skipping rate on selected target words), but they made more regressions back to the target words and more regressions overall. The E-Z Reader model was used as a platform to evaluate the results, and simulations using the model suggest that lexical processing is slowed in older readers and that, possibly as a result of this, they adopt a more risky reading strategy.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2005

Tests of the E-Z Reader model: exploring the interface between cognition and eye-movement control.

This paper is simultaneously a test and refinement of the E-Z Reader model and an exploration of the interrelationship between visual and language processing and eye-movements in reading. Our modeling indicates that the assumption that words in text are processed serially by skilled readers is a viable and attractive hypothesis, as it accounts not only for "normal" reading data, but also for the pattern of decrements that occur when text is withheld from view during certain periods of time, such as in the boundary paradigm and the disappearing text paradigm. Our analyses also indicate (a) that lexical processing during reading is essentially continuous and (b) that the trigger for eye movements has to be a different (and prior) event to the trigger for shifts of covert spatial attention. In addition, the parameter values in our model are in accordance with what is known about such processes and should be taken as serious hypotheses for how long these processes last. Although a parallel model may be able to duplicate the predictions of the E-Z Reader model, we think that it is likely to be far less parsimonious and not nearly as good a heuristic device for using eye movements to understand language processing in reading.

Cognition↗

PubMed2004

The effects of frequency and predictability on eye fixations in reading: implications for the E-Z Reader model.

Readers read sentences containing target words varying in frequency and predictability. The observed pattern of data for fixation durations only mildly departed from additivity, with predictability effects that were slightly larger for low-frequency than for high-frequency words. The pattern of data for skipping was different as predictability affected only the probability of skipping for high-frequency target words. Simulations of these data using the E-Z Reader model indicated that a single-process model was unlikely to provide a good fit for both measures. A version of the model that assumes that (a) word-encoding time is additively affected by frequency and predictability and (b) difficulty with postlexical processing of the target word causes a double take accounted for the data while indicating that the relationship between the duration of hypothesized word-encoding stages and observed fixation durations is not likely to be transparent.

Attention↗

PubMed2003

The E-Z reader model of eye-movement control in reading: comparisons to other models.

The E-Z Reader model (Reichle et al. 1998; 1999) provides a theoretical framework for understanding how word identification, visual processing, attention, and oculomotor control jointly determine when and where the eyes move during reading. In this article, we first review what is known about eye movements during reading. Then we provide an updated version of the model (E-Z Reader 7) and describe how it accounts for basic findings about eye movement control in reading. We then review several alternative models of eye movement control in reading, discussing both their core assumptions and their theoretical scope. On the basis of this discussion, we conclude that E-Z Reader provides the most comprehensive account of eye movement control during reading. Finally, we provide a brief overview of what is known about the neural systems that support the various components of reading, and suggest how the cognitive constructs of our model might map onto this neural architecture.

Eye Movements↗