Location of Repository

Orthographic familiarity influences initial eye fixation positions in reading

By Sarah J. White and S.P. Liversedge


This is the author's final draft of the paper published as European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 2004, 16 (1 & 2), pp.52-78 and can also be accessed via http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a713752493~db=all~order=pag

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Year: 2004
OAI identifier: oai:lra.le.ac.uk:2381/3898

Suggested articles



  1. (1991). (this volume2003). Error detection in the parafovea.
  2. (2000). Attentional demands on the processing of neighbouring words. In doi
  3. (1998). Determinants of fixation positions in words during reading. In doi
  4. (1998). Early, mandatory, pragmatic processing.
  5. (2000). Eye guidance and the saliency of word beginnings in reading text. In doi
  6. (1979). Eye guidance in reading: Fixation locations within words. doi
  7. (1998). Eye movement control during reading: A simulation of some word-targeting strategies. doi
  8. (1989). Eye movement control during reading: II. Frequency of refixating a word. Perception & doi
  9. (1996). Eye movement control in reading: A comparison of two types of models. doi
  10. (1999). Eye movement control in reading: Accounting for initial fixation locations and refixations within the E-Z reader model. doi
  11. (1992). Eye movement control in reading: Evidence against semantic preprocessing. doi
  12. (1982). Eye movement control in reading: The role of word boundaries. doi
  13. (2001). Eye movement control in reading: Word predictability has little influence on initial landing positions in words. doi
  14. (1990). Eye movement guidance in reading: The role of parafoveal letter and space information. doi
  15. (1990). Eye movements and reading. In doi
  16. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. doi
  17. (1990). How do readers know where to look next? Local information distributions influence eye fixations. doi
  18. (1995). Individual eye movement patterns in word recognition: Perceptual and linguistic factors. In doi
  19. (1988). influences the pattern of eye fixations during sentence comprehension. doi
  20. (1996). Lexical control of within-word eye movements. doi
  21. (1995). Mindless reading: Eye movement characteristics are similar in scanning letter strings and reading texts. doi
  22. (2003). On the processing of meaning from parafoveal vision during eye fixations in reading. In doi
  23. (1990). Optimal landing position in reading isolated words and continuous texts. doi
  24. (2003). Orthographic regularity gradually modulates saccade amplitudes in reading. doi
  25. (1975). Parafoveal identification during a fixation in reading. doi
  26. (1998). Parafoveal pragmatics. In doi
  27. (1998). Phonological codes and eye movements in reading. doi
  28. (1979). Saccade size control in reading: Evidence for the linguistic control hypothesis. doi
  29. (1987). Scanning patterns on individual words during the comprehension of sentences. doi
  30. (1985). Some temporal characteristics of processing during reading. doi
  31. (1982). The availability of useful information to the right of fixation in reading. doi
  32. (1980). The control of saccade size and fixation duration in reading: The limits of linguistic control. doi
  33. (2000). The effect of clause wrap-up on eye movements during reading. doi
  34. (1999). The influence of focus operators on syntactic processing of short relative clause sentences. doi
  35. (1983). The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences. doi
  36. (1975). The span of the effective stimulus during a fixation in reading. doi
  37. (1998). Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. doi
  38. (1998). Unspaced text interferes with both word identification and eye movement control. doi
  39. (2000). Words likely to generate many lexical candidates are granted an advantage: Evidence from within-word eye movements. In doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.