Serial and parallel processes in eye movement control: Current controversies and future directions.
In this editorial for the Special Issue on Serial and Parallel Processing in Reading we explore the background to the current debate concerning whether the word recognition processes in reading are strictly serial–sequential or take place in an overlapping parallel fashion. We consider the history o...
| Publicado en: | Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Vol. 66; no. 3; pp. 417 - 429 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , |
| Formato: | Editorial |
| Publicado: |
Sage Publications Inc.
Mar2013
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=86009358&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 86009358 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 17470218 1US5 jtl: Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology issn: 17470218 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Mar2013 vid: 66 iid: 3 pid: 344 pub: Sage Publications Inc. artinfo: ui: 86009358 10.1080/17470218.2012.759979 ppf: 417 ppct: 12 formats: tig: atl: Serial and parallel processes in eye movement control: Current controversies and future directions. aug: au: Murray, Wayne S. Fischer, Martin H. Tatler, Benjamin W. affil: School of Psychology, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK Psychology Department, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany su: Sensory perception Word recognition Eye movements Argument sug: subj: Sensory perception Word recognition Eye movements Argument keyword: Alan Kennedy Decoupling Eye–mind assumption Modality Modelling Reading Scene perception Serial and parallel Alan Kennedy Decoupling Eye–mind assumption Modality Modelling Reading Scene perception Serial and parallel ab: In this editorial for the Special Issue on Serial and Parallel Processing in Reading we explore the background to the current debate concerning whether the word recognition processes in reading are strictly serial–sequential or take place in an overlapping parallel fashion. We consider the history of the controversy and some of the underlying assumptions, together with an analysis of the types of evidence and arguments that have been adduced to both sides of the debate, concluding that both accounts necessarily presuppose some weakening of, or elasticity in, the eye–mind assumption. We then consider future directions, both for reading research and for scene viewing, and wrap up the editorial with a brief overview of the following articles and their conclusions. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Editorial src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|