title: Frequency and Predictability Effects in Eye Fixations for Skilled and Less-Skilled Deaf Readers.
abstract: The illiteracy rate in the deaf population has been alarmingly high for several decades, despite the fact that deaf children go through the standard stages of schooling. Much research addressing this issue has focused on word-level processes, but in the recent years, little research has focused on sentence-levels processes. Previous research (Fischler, 1985) investigated word integration within context in college-level deaf and hearing readers in a lexical decision task following incomplete sentences with targets that were congruous or incongruous relative to the preceding context; it was found that deaf readers, as a group, were more dependent on contextual information than their hearing counterparts. The present experiment extended Fischler's results and investigated the relationship between frequency, predictability, and reading skill in skilled hearing, skilled deaf, and less-skilled deaf readers. Results suggest that only less-skilled deaf readers, and not all deaf readers, rely more on contextual cues to boost word processing. Additionally, early effects of frequency and predictability were found for all three groups of readers, without any evidence for an interaction between frequency and predictability.
authors: Department of Psychology, University of California, San Diego.
authors: Nathalie N
authors: NN
authors: Bélanger
authors: Keith
authors: K
authors: Rayner
keywords: Deaf readers; eye movements; frequency effects; predictability effects; reading skill
references: Psychol Rev. 1980 Jul;87(4):329-54
references: 7413885
references: Percept Psychophys. 1986 Dec;40(6):431-9
references: 3808910
references: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2011 Apr;37(2):514-28
references: 21463086
references: Psychon Bull Rev. 1996 Dec;3(4):504-9
references: 24213985
references: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2012 Feb;38(1):251-61
references: 22082213
references: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1995 Nov;21(6):1430-40
references: 7490575
references: Vision Res. 2001 Mar;41(7):943-54
references: 11248279
references: Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2009 Aug;62(8):1457-506
references: 19449261
references: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2004 Aug;30(4):720-32
references: 15301620
references: Psychol Sci. 2012 Jul 1;23(7):816-23
references: 22683830
references: J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2011 Spring;16(2):164-88
references: 21071623
references: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2005 Oct;31(5):954-9
references: 16262491
references: Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2013;66(11):2237-52
references: 23768045
references: J Exp Psychol Gen. 1999 Sep;128(3):219-64
references: 10513396
references: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2011 May;140(2):186-209
references: 21219080
references: Psychol Aging. 2006 Sep;21(3):448-65
references: 16953709
references: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2010 Oct;36(5):1294-313
references: 20854004
references: Nature. 2002 May 2;417(6884):38
references: 11986658
references: J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2003 Summer;8(3):230-49
references: 15448051
references: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1996 Oct;22(5):1188-200
references: 8865619
references: Cogn Psychol. 1985 Jul;17(3):364-90
references: 4053565
references: Behav Res Methods. 2005 Feb;37(1):65-70
references: 16097345
references: Mem Cognit. 1986 May;14(3):191-201
references: 3736392
references: Psychol Bull. 1998 Nov;124(3):372-422
references: 9849112
references: Q J Exp Psychol A. 2005 Aug;58(6):1065-86
references: 16194948