SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics / 2015 / Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 2

Eye movements in reading span tasks to working memory functions and second language reading

Gülcan ERÇETİN
Cem ALPTEKİN
Pages
35–56
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings reveal that storage performance was negatively affected by fixation durations within the “critical” region of each sentence, indicating trade-off between processing and storage.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In an eye-tracking experiment with late second language (L2) learners, the present study probed into the relationship between eye-movement (EM) measures and the processing and storage outcomes of reading span tasks (RST) to determine whether EM patterns actually reflect working memory (WM) functions in the L2.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Additionally, it examined the relationship between WM capacity as indexed by EMs and L2 reading comprehension to explore whether it was possible to map offline and online data as predictors of L2 reading.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings reveal that storage performance was negatively affected by fixation durations within the “critical” region of each sentence, indicating trade-off between processing and storage.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In an eye-tracking experiment with late second language (L2) learners, the present study probed into the relationship between eye-movement (EM) measures and the processing and storage outcomes of reading span tasks (RST) to determine whether EM patterns actually reflect working memory (WM) functions in the L2. Additionally, it examined the relationship between WM capacity as indexed by EMs and L2 reading comprehension to explore whether it was possible to map offline and online data as predictors of L2 reading. The findings reveal that storage performance was negatively affected by fixation durations within the “critical” region of each sentence, indicating trade-off between processing and storage. Additionally, regressions launched from the sentence-final region were negatively related to not only storage and processing performance but also L2 reading comprehension. These results have implications regarding whether EMs can be instrumental in validating offline span task outcomes and their association with L2 reading.

🔖

Cite This Article

ERÇETİN, G., ALPTEKİN, C. (2022). Eye movements in reading span tasks to working memory functions and second language reading. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 2, 35–56. https://ajindex.com/articles/507089

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (4)

  1. Alptekin, C., Erçetin, G. (2010). The role of L1 and L2 working memory in literal and inferential comprehension in L2 reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 33, 206—219. http://doi.org/fsfjxc
  2. Alptekin, C., Erçetin, G. (2011). The effects of working memory capacity and content familiarity on literal and inferential comprehension in L2 reading. TESOL Quarterly, 45, 235—266. http:/ldoi.org/dzdjjp Andrews, G., Birney, D., Halford, G. S. (2006). Relational processing and working memory capacity in comprehension of relative clause sentences. Memory Cognition, 34, 1325— 1340. Barrouillet, P., Bernardin, S., Portrat, S., Vergauwe, E., Camos, V. (2007). Time and cognitive load in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 570—585. http:/ldoi.org/cm22dw Barrouillet, P., Portrat, S., Camos, V. (2011). On the law relating processing to storage in working memory. Psychological Review, 118, 17 5—192. http://doi.org/bq7rsv
  3. Beckman, J. F. (2010). Taming beast of burden On some issues with the conceptualisation and operationalisation of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 20, 250—264. http:/ldoi.org/dmczgh Binder, K. S., Morris, R. K. (2011). An eye-movement analysis of ambiguity resolution: Beyond meaning access. Discourse Processes, 48, 305-330. http:/ldoi.org/cq35kp Boland, J. E. (2004). Linking eye movements to sentence comprehension in reading and listening. In M. Carreiras C. Clifton (Eds), The on-line study of sentence comprehension: Eyetracking, ERP, and beyond (pp. 51—7 6). New York: Psychology Press.
  4. Boland, J. E., Blodgett, A. (2002). Eye movement as measure of syntactic and semantic incongruity in unambiguous sentences. Unpublished manuscript, University of Michigan. Braze, D., Shankweiler, D., Ni, W., Palumbo, L. C. (2002). Readers’ eye movements distinguish anomalies of form and content. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31, 25—44. Caillies, S., Declercq, C. (2011). Kill the song—steal the show: What does distinguish predicative metaphors from decomposable idioms? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 40, 205—223. http:/ldoi.org/ck8fqg Cappelletti, M., Fregni, F., Shapiro, K., Pascual-Leone, A., Caramazza, A. (2008). Processing nouns and verbs in the left frontal cortex: transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 07—720. Clifton, C., Staub, A., Rayner, K. (2007). Eye movements in reading words and sentences. In R. P. G. Van Gompel, M. H. Fischer, W. S. Murray, R. L.