References 569letter information and some sound information across the two
fixations. In addition, the predictability of a word within a
sentence context has an effect on the speed of word identifi-
cation, with predictable words processed faster than are
unpredictable words. The reasons for this are a matter of
debate. However, effects of context on word identification
are generally small, and much of the work on word percep-
tion suggests that visual information can be processed
quickly even without the aid of context. Thus, predictability
and other contextual factors may actually only play a limited
role in word processing in reading. More specifically, as
Balota et al. (1985) have shown, context primarily influences
the amount of information that may be extracted from the
parafovea and thus, more generally, context may become in-
creasingly important when visual information is poor.
REFERENCES
Altarriba, J., Kambe, G., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2001).
Semantic codes are not used in integrated information across eye
fixations in reading: Evidence from fluent Spanish-English bilin-
guals.Perception & Psychophysics, 63,875–890.
Balota, D. A. (1983). Automatic semantic activation and episodic
memory encoding. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Be-
havior, 22,88–104.
Balota, D. A., & Chumbley, J. I. (1984). Are lexical decisions a good
measure of lexical access? The role of word frequency in the ne-
glected decision stage. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Human Perception and Performance, 10,340–357.
Balota, D. A., & Chumbley, J. I. (1985). The locus of word-
frequency effects in the pronunciation task: Lexical access
and/or production? Journal of Memory and Language, 24,
89–106.
Balota, D. A., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1985). The interaction of
contextual constraints and parafoveal visual information in read-
ing.Cognitive Psychology, 17,364–390.
Balota, D. A., & Rayner, K. (1983). Parafoveal visual information and
semantic contextual constraints.Journal of Experimental Psy-
chology: Human Perception and Performance, 9,726–738.
Baron, J., & Strawson, C. (1976). Use of orthographic and word-
specific knowledge in reading words aloud. Journal of Experi-
mental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2,
386–393.
Baron, J., & Thurston, I. (1973). An analysis of the word superiority
effect. Cognitive Psychology, 4,207–228.
Bauer, D., & Stanovich, K. E. (1980). Lexical access and the
spelling-to-sound regularity effect. Memory & Cognition, 8,
424–432.
Becker, C. A. (1985). What do we really know about semantic con-
text effects during reading? In D. Besner, T. G. Waller, & G. E.
MacKinnon (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and
practice(pp. 125–166). New York: Academic Press.
Besner, D., Coltheart, M., & Davelaar, E. (1984). Basic processes in
reading: Computation of abstract letter identities. Canadian
Journal of Psychology, 38,126–134.
Besner, D., Stolz, J. A., & Boutilier, C. (1997). The Stroop effect and
the myth of automaticity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4,
221–225.
Besner, D., Twilley, L., McCann, R. S., & Seergobin, K. (1990). On
the association between connectionism and data: Are a few
words necessary? Psychological Review, 97,432–446.
Binder, K. S., Duffy, S. A., & Rayner, K. (2001). The effects of the-
matic fit and discourse context in syntactic ambiguity resolution.
Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 297–324.
Binder, K. S., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1999). Extraction of in-
formation to the left of the fixated word in reading. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,
25,1142–1158.
Binder, K. S., & Rayner, K. (1998). Contextual strength does not
modulate the subordinate bias effect: Evidence from eye fixa-
tions and self-paced reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5,
271–276.
Blanchard, H. E., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1989). The acquisi-
tion of parafoveal word information in reading. Perception &
Psychophysics, 46,85–94.
Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1983). What your eyes do while your
mind is reading. In K. Rayner (Ed.), Eye movements in reading:
Perceptual and language processes(pp. 275–307). New York:
Academic Press.
Carr, T. H., McCauley, C., Sperber, R. D., & Parmelee, C. M.
(1982). Words, pictures, and priming: On semantic activation,
conscious identification, and the automaticity of information
processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Per-
ception and Performance, 8,757–777.
Carr, T. H., & Pollatsek, A. (1985). Recognizing printed words: A
look at current models. In D. Besner, T. G. Waller, & G. E.
MacKinnon (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and
practice(Vol. 5, pp. 2–82 ). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Carroll, P. J., & Slowiaczek, M. L. (1987). Models and modules: Mul-
tiple pathways to the language processor. In J. L. Garfield (Ed.),
Modularity in knowledge representation and natural-language
understanding(pp. 221–248). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Coltheart, M. (1978). Lexical access in simple reading tasks. In G.
Underwood (Ed.), Strategies of information processing(pp.
151–216). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Coltheart, M. (1981). Disorders of reading and their implications for
models of normal reading. Visible Language, 15,245–286.
Coltheart, M., Curtis, B., Atkins, P., & Haller, M. (1993). Models of
reading aloud: Dual-route and parallel-distributed-processing
approaches.Psychological Review, 100,589–608.
Coltheart, M., Patterson, K., & Marshall, J. (1980). Deep dyslexia.
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.