바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.32 No.2

Citation Share

Interaction Effects of Text Difficulty and Individual Differences in Cognitive Abilities during Reading: An Eye-Tracking Study

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2020, v.32 no.2, pp.223-234
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2020.32.2.008



& (2020). Interaction Effects of Text Difficulty and Individual Differences in Cognitive Abilities during Reading: An Eye-Tracking Study. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 32(2), 223-234, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2020.32.2.008

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate how text difficulty and readers’ individual differences in cognitive abilities affect eye movements while reading. Participants were asked to read given texts and to respond a question for each text. They were also administrated a battery of individual-difference tasks measuring abilities of language, short-term/working memory capacity, and executive control. The main findings were as follows. First, text difficulty negatively influenced on reading speed. Second, individual differences in language and cognitive abilities affected reading speed. Specifically, higher language ability and bigger capacity of short-term/working memory were associated with faster reading speed. Finally, interaction effects between text difficulty and individual differences were emerged such that those who had better language skills and bigger working memory size read easy texts faster than those who had not did. However, such abilities did not have effects on reading speed of difficult texts. Theoretical and methodological issues on the current findings were discussed.

keywords
읽기 이해, 안구 운동, 개인차, 글의 난이도, reading comprehension, eye movements, individual differences, text difficulty

Reference

1.

Andrews, S. (2012). Individual differences in skilled visual word recognition and reading: The role of lexical quality: Sally Andrews. In Visual Word Recognition Volume 2 (pp. 163-184). Psychology Press.

2.

Ashby, J., Rayner, K., & Clifton, C. (2005). Eye movements of highly skilled and average readers: Differential effects of frequency and predictability. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 58, 1065-1086.

3.

Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. M., & Walker, S. C. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1-48.

4.

Boudewyn, M. A., Carter, C. S., & Swaab, T. Y. (2012). Cognitive control and discourse comprehension in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research and Treatment, 2012. 484502.

5.

Braver, T. S. (2012). The variable nature of cognitive control: a dual mechanisms framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16, 106-113.

6.

Choi, W., Lowder, M. W., Ferreira, F., & Henderson, J. M. (2015). Individual differences in the perceptual span during reading: Evidence from the moving window technique. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77, 2463-2475.

7.

Daneman, M., & Merikle, P. M. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 422-433.

8.

Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450-466.

9.

Davis, F. B. (1968). Research in comprehension in reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 3, 499-545.

10.

Engle, R. W., Conway, A. R. A., Tuholski, S. W., & Shisler, R. J. (1995). A resource account of inhibition. Psychological Science, 6, 122-125.

11.

Fedorenko, E. (2014). The role of domain-general cognitive control in language comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 335.

12.

Gilhooly, K. J., Logie, R. H., Wetherick, N. E., & Wynn, V. (1993). Working memory and strategies in syllogisticreasoning tasks. Memory & Cognition, 21, 115-124.

13.

Gordon, P. C., Moore, M., Choi, W., Hoedemaker, R. S., &Lowder, M. W. (in press). Individual differences in reading:Separable effects of reading experience and processing skill. Memory & Cognition.

14.

Hyönä, J., Lorch Jr, R. F., & Kaakinen, J. K. (2002). Individual differences in reading to summarize expository text:Evidence from eye fixation patterns. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 44-55.

15.

Jared, D., Levy, B. A., & Rayner, K. (1999). The role of phonology in the activation of word meanings during reading: Evidence from proofreading and eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128, 219-264.

16.

Kuperman, V., & Van Dyke, J. A. (2011). Effects of individual differences in verbal skills on eye-movement patterns during sentence reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 42-73.

17.

Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1-26.

18.

Lee, B. T., Kim, K. J., & Zoh, M. H. (1996). Working memory and language: Comprehension individual differences in reading span and language processing. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 8, 59-85.

19.

Lee, H., Seong, E., Choi, W., & Lowder, M. W. (2019). Development and assessment of the Korean Author Recognition Test. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72, 1837-1846.

20.

Lee, J. H., Kim, S. I., Kim, S. Y., & Yoo H. J. (1999). Individual differences in narrative comprehension: Differences in sentence integration and goal inference. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 11, 59-76.

21.

Lee, Y., & Kwon, Y. (2012) The effect of the individual differences in cognitive processes on paragraph comprehension: Structural equation modeling. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 23, 487-516.

22.

Luke, S. G. (2017). Evaluating significance in linear mixedeffects models in R. Behavior Research Methods, 49, 1494-1502.

23.

Mol, S. E., & Bus, A. G. (2011). To read or not to read: A meta-analysis of print exposure from infancy to early adulthood. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 267-296.

24.

Novick, J. M., Trueswell, J. C., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2005). Cognitive control and parsing: Reexamining the role of Broca’s area in sentence comprehension. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 5, 263-281.

25.

Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

26.

Perfetti, C. A. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 357-383.

27.

Perfetti, C. A., Landi, N., & Oakhill, J. (2005). The acquisition of reading comprehension skill. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 227-247). Oxford, England: Blackwell.

28.

R Core Team (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org/.

29.

Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422.

30.

Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology, 62, 1457-1506.

31.

Rayner, K., Chace, K. H., Slattery, T. J., & Ashby, J. (2006). Eye movements as reflections of comprehension processes in reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 241-255.

32.

Satterthwaite, F. E. (1941). Synthesis of variance. Psychometrika, 6, 309-316.

33.

Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360-407.

34.

Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 402-433.

35.

Stanovich, K. E., Cunningham, A. E., & Feeman, D. J. (1984). Intelligence, cognitive skills, and early reading progress. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 278-303.

36.

Thorndike, R. L. (1973). Reading as reasoning. Reading Research Quarterly, 9, 135-147.

37.

Vos, S. H., & Friederici, A. D. (2003). Intersentential syntactic context effects on comprehension: The role of working memory. Cognitive Brain Research, 16, 111-122.

38.

Yoon, N. Y., & Koh, S. (2009). Eye-movements in reading easy and difficult texts. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 20, 291-307.

39.

Yuill, N., Oakhill, J. (1991). Children’s Problems in Text Comprehension, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy