Eye movement analyses indicate the underlying reading strategy in the recovery of lexical readers
Eye movement analyses indicate the underlying reading strategy in the recovery of lexical readers
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/02687038.2014.894960
复制
发表时间：
2014-06-03
期刊：
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
Radach, Ralph
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ablinger, Irene;Huber, Walter;Radach, Ralph
背景：不同阅读任务中阅读困难反应的心理语言学误差分析为临床区分病理性阅读亚型提供了主要依据。在这个框架中，语音相关的错误表明了顺序文字处理策略，而词汇和语义错误则与词汇阅读策略有关。尽管发表了大量的干预研究，但对阅读障碍患者恢复过程中误差分布的变化知之甚少。目的：本研究的主要目的是扩大对获得性阅读障碍读者恢复时间过程的研究范围，使用眼动追踪方法实时检查文字处理。指导性假设是，在词汇阅读者中，词汇错误的减少和语音错误的主要产生应该与更分段的时刻到时刻阅读行为的变化有关。方法与步骤：5例患者参与眼动支持阅读干预，促进词汇和片段阅读。通过记录眼球运动来评估治疗干预前（T1）和后（T2）的阅读表现。分析包括一种新的方法来检查处理的时空动态，使用固定位置的分布作为不同的时间间隔。这些子分布揭示了文字处理过程中注视位置的逐渐变化，为在线阅读策略的客观分类提供了充分的度量。结果与结果：治疗干预提高了所有受试者的阅读准确性。分析显示，在五名参与者中，有三名的潜在阅读机制发生了重组，从主要的词汇阅读转向更多的分段文字处理。相比之下，两名受试者保持了他们的词汇阅读过程。重要的是，大量基于语音的阅读错误一定与分段文字处理例程有关，而词汇错误的产生表明整体阅读策略的基本假设无法得到验证。结论：我们的研究结果表明，尽管阅读表现普遍改善，但只有一些患者重组了他们的单词识别过程。矛盾的数据对心理语言学错误分析作为阅读策略变化的唯一指标的有效性提出了质疑。我们建议将这种传统方法与创新的眼动追踪方法相结合，以获得更全面的诊断策略。
Background: Psycholinguistic error analysis of dyslexic responses in various reading tasks provides the primary basis for clinically discriminating subtypes of pathological reading. Within this framework, phonology-related errors are indicative of a sequential word processing strategy, whereas lexical and semantic errors are associated with a lexical reading strategy. Despite the large number of published intervention studies, relatively little is known about changes in error distributions during recovery in dyslexic patients.Aims: The main purpose of the present work was to extend the scope of research on the time course of recovery in readers with acquired dyslexia, using eye tracking methodology to examine word processing in real time. The guiding hypothesis was that in lexical readers a reduction of lexical errors and an emerging predominant production of phonological errors should be associated with a change to a more segmental moment-to-moment reading behaviour.Methods & Procedures: Five patients participated in an eye movement supported reading intervention, where both lexical and segmental reading was facilitated. Reading performance was assessed before (T1) and after (T2) therapy intervention via recording of eye movements. Analyses included a novel way to examine the spatiotemporal dynamics of processing using distributions of fixation positions as different time intervals. These subdistributions reveal the gradual shifting of fixation positions during word processing, providing an adequate metric for objective classification of online reading strategies.Outcome & Results: Therapy intervention led to improved reading accuracy in all subjects. In three of five participants, analyses revealed a restructuring in the underlying reading mechanisms from predominantly lexical to more segmental word processing. In contrast, two subjects maintained their lexical reading procedures. Importantly, the fundamental assumption that a high number of phonologically based reading errors must be associated with segmental word processing routines, while the production of lexical errors is indicative of a holistic reading strategy could not be verified.Conclusions: Our results indicate that despite general improvements in reading performance, only some patients reorganised their word identification process. Contradictive data raise doubts on the validity of psycholinguistic error analysis as an exclusive indicator of changes in reading strategy. We suggest this traditional approach to combine with innovative eye tracking methodology in the interest of more comprehensive diagnostic strategies.