ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B

心理学报 ›› 2020, Vol. 52 ›› Issue (8): 933-945.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.00933

• 研究报告 • 上一篇    下一篇


张慢慢, 臧传丽(), 徐宇峰, 白学军(), 闫国利   

  1. 教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地天津师范大学心理与行为研究院, 天津师范大学心理学部, “学生心理发展与学习”天津市高校社会科学实验室, 天津 300387
  • 收稿日期:2019-11-21 发布日期:2020-06-28 出版日期:2020-08-25
  • 通讯作者: 臧传丽,白学军;
  • 基金资助:
    * 国家自然科学基金项目(31800920);国家自然科学基金项目(31571122);天津市人才发展特殊支持计划青年拔尖人才项目; 天津师范大学杰出青年创新团队项目(52WZ1702);教育部“长江学者”奖励计划特聘教授; 教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大项目(18JJD190001)

The influence of foveal processing load on parafoveal preview of fast and slow readers during Chinese reading

ZHANG Manman, ZANG Chuanli(), XU Yufeng, BAI Xuejun(), YAN Guoli   

  1. Key Research Base of Humanities and Social Sciences of the Ministry of Education, Academy of Psychology and Behavior, Tianjin Normal University, Faculty of Psychology, Tianjin Normal University, Tianjin Social Science Laboratory of Students' Mental Development and Learning, Tianjin 300387, China
  • Received:2019-11-21 Online:2020-06-28 Published:2020-08-25
  • Contact: ZANG Chuanli,BAI Xuejun;


在中文阅读中, 预视量是否存在个体差异及其是否受中央凹加工调节, 尚不清楚。本研究采用眼动技术和边界范式, 通过操纵前目标词的加工负荷(高、低)与目标词的预视(相同、假字)来考察快速与慢速读者的中央凹加工对副中央凹预视的影响。结果显示, 中央凹负荷主效应显著; 快速读者对低负荷词的首次和单次注视短于高负荷词, 而慢速读者对两种负荷词的首次和单次注视无差异, 表明快速读者能更快利用词汇特性加工中央凹词汇。预视主效应显著, 即与假字预视相比, 相同预视使两组读者都对目标词的注视更短、向前眼跳更长、跳读率更高; 而且该效应与中央凹负荷没有交互作用。这表明快速读者与慢速读者提取了等量预视, 且不受其中央凹加工的调节。E-Z读者模型和SWIFT模型不能完全解释当前结果。

关键词: 快速读者, 慢速读者, 副中央凹预视, 中央凹加工负荷, 中文阅读


Parafoveal pre-processing contributes to highly efficient reading for skilled readers. Research has demonstrated that high-skilled or fast readers extract more parafoveal information from a wider parafoveal region more efficiently compared to less-skilled or slow readers. It is argued that individual differences in parafoveal preview are due to high-skilled or fast readers focusing less of their attention on foveal word processing than less-skilled or slow readers. In other words, foveal processing difficulty might modulate an individual's amount of parafoveal preview (i.e., Foveal Load Hypothesis). However, few studies have provided evidence in support of this claim. Therefore, the present study aimed to explore whether and how foveal lexical processing load modulates parafoveal preview of readers with different reading speeds (a commonly used measurement of reading skill or reading proficiency).

By using a three-minute reading comprehension task, 28 groups of fast and slow readers were selected from 300 participants (234 were valid) according to their reading speed in the current study. Participants were then asked to read sentences while their eye movements were recorded using an Eyelink 1000 eyetracker. Each experimental sentence contained a pre-target word that varied in lexical frequency to manipulate foveal processing load (low load: high frequency; high load: low frequency), and a target word manipulated for preview (identical or pseudo-character) within the boundary paradigm.

Global analyses showed that, although fast readers had similar accuracy of reading comprehension to slow readers, they had shorter reading times, longer forward saccades, made less fixations and regressions, and had higher reading speeds compared to slow readers, indicating that our selection of fast and slow readers was highly effective. The pre-target word analyses showed that there was a main effect of word frequency on first-pass reading times, indicating an effective manipulation of foveal load. Additionally, there were significant interactions of Reading Group × Word Frequency, and Reading Group × Word Frequency × Parafoveal Preview for first fixation and single fixation durations, showing that the frequency effects were reliable for fast readers rather than for slow readers with pseudocharacter previews, while the frequency effects were similar for the two groups with identical previews. However, the target word analyses did not show any three-way or two-way interactions for the first-pass reading times as well as for skipping probability. To be specific, the first-pass reading times were shorter at the target word with identical previews in relation to pseudocharacter previews (i.e. preview benefit effects); importantly, similar size effects occurred for both fast readers and slow readers.

The findings in the present study suggest that lexical information from the currently fixated word can be extracted and can be used quickly for fast readers, while such information is used later for slow readers. This, however, does not result in more (or less) preview benefit for fast readers in relation to slow readers. In conclusion, foveal lexical processing does not modulate preview benefit for fast and slow readers, and the present results provide no support for the Foveal Load Hypothesis. Our findings of foveal load effects on parafoveal preview for fast and slow readers cannot be readily explained by current computational models (e.g., E-Z Reader model and SWIFT model).

Key words: fast readers, slow readers, parafoveal preview, foveal processing load, Chinese reading.