title: Connected text reading and differences in text reading fluency in adult readers.
abstract: The process of connected text reading has received very little attention in contemporary cognitive psychology. This lack of attention is in parts due to a research tradition that emphasizes the role of basic lexical constituents, which can be studied in isolated words or sentences. However, this lack of attention is in parts also due to the lack of statistical analysis techniques, which accommodate interdependent time series. In this study, we investigate text reading performance with traditional and nonlinear analysis techniques and show how outcomes from multiple analyses can used to create a more detailed picture of the process of text reading. Specifically, we investigate reading performance of groups of literate adult readers that differ in reading fluency during a self-paced text reading task. Our results indicate that classical metrics of reading (such as word frequency) do not capture text reading very well, and that classical measures of reading fluency (such as average reading time) distinguish relatively poorly between participant groups. Nonlinear analyses of distribution tails and reading time fluctuations provide more fine-grained information about the reading process and reading fluency.
authors: CAP Center for Cognition, Action and Perception, Department of Psychology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, United States of America ; Interacting Minds Centre, Department of Culture and Society, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Midtjylland, Denmark.
authors: Sebastian
authors: S
authors: Wallot
authors: Geoff
authors: G
authors: Hollis
authors: Marieke
authors: M
authors: van Rooij
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D005133:Eye Movements; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D017711:Nonlinear Dynamics; D011930:Reaction Time; D011932:Reading; D055815:Young Adult
references: Vision Res. 2005 Jan;45(2):153-68
references: 15581917
references: Psychol Rev. 1980 Jul;87(4):329-54
references: 7413885
references: Psychol Rev. 2001 Jan;108(1):57-82
references: 11212633
references: Exp Brain Res. 2005 Jun;163(3):370-8
references: 15655686
references: J Appl Physiol (1985). 1994 Feb;76(2):965-73
references: 8175612
references: PLoS One. 2009 Nov 13;4(11):e7822
references: 19915658
references: J Exp Psychol Gen. 1982 Jun;111(2):228-38
references: 6213735
references: Psychol Bull. 2008 May;134(3):427-59
references: 18444704
references: J Gerontol. 1972 Oct;27(4):456-60
references: 5075489
references: Behav Res Methods. 2007 Aug;39(3):445-59
references: 17958156
references: Nonlinear Dynamics Psychol Life Sci. 2009 Jan;13(1):79-98
references: 19061546
references: Mem Cognit. 1998 Jan;26(1):34-9
references: 9519695
references: Vision Res. 1997 Oct;37(20):2899-914
references: 9415369
references: Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):433-6
references: 9176952
references: J Psycholinguist Res. 2013 Feb;42(1):21-35
references: 22415732
references: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2009 Dec;35(6):1811-32
references: 19968438
references: Percept Psychophys. 1998 Apr;60(3):484-90
references: 9599997
references: Ann Dyslexia. 2012 Jul;62(2):100-19
references: 22460607
references: Front Physiol. 2013 Jan 29;4:1
references: 23372552
references: Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2009 Feb;79(2 Pt 1):021903
references: 19391774
references: Eur J Soc Psychol. 2006;36(2):147-168
references: 19844598
references: Psychol Rev. 2009 Apr;116(2):318-42
references: 19348544
references: Annu Rev Psychol. 2001;52:167-96
references: 11148303
references: Psychol Sci. 2011 Jun;22(6):829-34
references: 21586764
references: Neurosci Lett. 2010 Feb 12;470(2):121-5
references: 20045718
references: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2010 Aug;139(3):436-63
references: 20677894
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 May 17;108(20):8514-9
references: 21536887
references: Mem Cognit. 1982 May;10(3):287-96
references: 7121249
references: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1996 Jul;22(4):827-45
references: 8708602
references: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2006 Aug;135(3):348-67
references: 16846269