Eye-Movement Control in RAN and Reading.
The present study examined thevisual scanning hypothesis, which suggests that fluent oculomotor control is an important component underlying the predictive relationship between Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) tasks and reading ability. Our approach was to isolate components of saccadic planning, articulation, and lexical retrieval in three modified RAN tasks. We analyzed two samples of undergraduate readers (age 17-27), we evaluated the incremental contributions of these components and found that saccadic planning to non-linguistic stimuli alone explained roughly one-third of the variance that conventional RAN tasks explained in eye-movements registered during text reading for comprehension. We conclude that the well-established predictive role of RAN for reading performance is in part due to the individual ability to coordinate rapid sequential eye-movements to visual non-linguistic stimuli.
McMaster University and Haskins Laboratories.
Victor
V
Kuperman
Haskins Laboratories.
Julie A
JA
Van Dyke
McMaster University.
Regina
R
Henry
individual differences; oculomotor control; rapid automatized naming; reading ability; visual scanning hypothesis
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2013 Apr;39(2):554-67
22924951
Vision Res. 1994 May;34(10):1345-58
8023443
J Mem Lang. 2011 Feb 1;64(2):153-170
22707848
Percept Psychophys. 1997 Oct;59(7):1059-68
9360478
Brain Lang. 1981 Sep;14(1):174-80
7272722
Psychol Rev. 2005 Oct;112(4):777-813
16262468
Vision Res. 2009 Feb;49(3):322-36
19026673
Psychon Bull Rev. 2010 Dec;17(6):834-9
21169577
Dyslexia. 2008 May;14(2):95-115
17874457
J Exp Child Psychol. 2001 Apr;78(4):359-73
11243694
Cognition. 2010 Jun;115(3):367-79
20227686
Percept Psychophys. 1989 Mar;45(3):196-208
2710617
Neuropsychologia. 2006;44(4):637-48
16115655
Percept Psychophys. 1980 Jun;27(6):537-44
7393701
J Learn Disabil. 1994 May;27(5):276-86; discussion 287-91
8006506
J Mem Lang. 2011 Jul;65(1):42-73
21709808
Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1978 Aug;55(8):557-70
742646
Neuropsychologia. 1976;14(4):471-9
995240
Percept Psychophys. 1995 Apr;57(3):352-64
7770326
Res Dev Disabil. 2013 Jan;34(1):452-60
23041659
Q J Exp Psychol A. 1989 Feb;41(1):63-89
2710940
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2013;66(11):2085-91
24161215
Behav Brain Sci. 2003 Aug;26(4):445-76; discussion 477-526
15067951
J Learn Disabil. 1980 Jan;13(1):16-21
7373140
Percept Psychophys. 1982 Jun;31(6):537-50
7122189
Annu Rev Psychol. 2012;63:427-52
21838545
J Exp Child Psychol. 2013 May;115(1):218-25
23384823
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2014;67(4):703-27
23972214
J Exp Child Psychol. 2013 Jul;115(3):579-89
23499320
J Learn Disabil. 2008 Jan-Feb;41(1):47-66
18274503
Cognition. 2005 Jul;96(3):B89-100
15913592
Dev Sci. 2013 Nov;16(6):967-79
24118721
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2009 Aug;62(8):1457-506
19449261
J Exp Child Psychol. 2012 May;112(1):1-17
22297121
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Jun 14;102(24):8781-5
15939871
J Exp Child Psychol. 1991 Apr;51(2):195-219
2033360
Front Hum Neurosci. 2013 Jul 29;7:384
23908615
J Learn Disabil. 2004 Sep-Oct;37(5):451-61
15460351
Psychon Bull Rev. 2009 Jun;16(3):567-72
19451386
Percept Psychophys. 1996 Jul;58(5):734-47
8710452
J Learn Disabil. 2000 Jul-Aug;33(4):387-407
15493099
Psychol Bull. 1998 Nov;124(3):372-422
9849112