PSYCHOLOGY OF READING

PSYCHOLOGY OF
READING
Second Edition

Keith Rayner
University of California, San Diego

Alexander Pollatsek
University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Jane Ashby
Central Michigan University

Charles Clifton, Jr.

University of Massachusetts, Amherst
First published 2012
by Psychology Press
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017
Simultaneously published in the UK
by Psychology Press
27 Church Road, Hove, East Sussex BN3 2FA
www.psypress.com
Psychology Press is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2012 Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or
utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now
known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in
any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or
registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation
without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN: 978-1-84872-943-8 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-1-84872-975-9 (pbk)

Cover design: Aubergine Design

Typeset in Sabon
by RefineCatch Ltd, Bungay, Suffolk, UK
Printed and bound in the United States of America on acid-free paper.
CONTENTS

Preface vii
About the Authors ix

PART I
Background Information 1

1 Introduction and Preliminary Information 3

2 Writing Systems 23

3 Word Perception I: Some Basic Issues and Methods 49

PART II
Skilled Reading of Text 89

4 The Work of the Eyes 91

5 Word Perception II: Word Identification in Text 135

6 A Model of Eye Movements in Reading 163

PART III
Understanding Text 185

7 Inner Speech 187

8 Words and Sentences 215

9 Comprehension of Discourse 245

vi Contents

PART IV
Beginning Reading, Reading Disorders, and Individual Differences 277

10 Stages of Reading Development 279

11 Learning to Read 309

12 Reading Disorders 345

13 Speed Reading, Proofreading, and Individual Differences 377

14 Final Overview 397

References 405
Author Index 463
Subject Index 479
PREFACE

Reading is a highly complex skill that is prerequisite to success in many societies where a great deal
of information is communicated in written form. Therefore it is important to investigate this
essential behavior. In the past 40 years a great deal has been learned about the reading process from
research by cognitive psychologists. This book is our attempt to summarize that work and to put
it into a coherent framework. For the most part, our emphasis is on the process of reading. We are
most interested in how readers go about extracting information from the printed page and compre-
hending the text. We will not be as concerned about the product of reading (or what people
remember from what they have read). Nor will we be centrally concerned with issues about how
to teach children to read. Each of these issues is addressed in the book (the products of reading in
Chapters 8 and 9, and learning to read in Chapters 10 and 11), but the major focus is on the
moment-to-moment processes that a reader engages in during reading.
We have written this book for advanced undergraduates and beginning-level graduate students
in psychology, although we would hope that our colleagues in cognitive psychology who are inter-
ested in the process of reading will find the work useful to them. We suspect that faculty and
students in Schools of Education may not find the book consistent with some of their beliefs, but
we would hope that they find our point of view interesting and even persuasive. We have tried to
write the text so that it is accessible to students who do not have a background in psychology. The
book is divided into four sections. In Section I we provide an overview of some relevant back-
ground information that should be particularly important to readers who do not have a back-
ground in cognitive psychology. In this first section we present an analysis of writing systems and
also discuss how readers recognize words. Section II deals with the work of the eyes during reading.
In this section we provide basic background information on eye movements during reading, and
on the important topic of how words are processed during reading. In Section III our focus
changes and we investigate how readers put words together to comprehend sentences and texts.
This section contains chapters on inner speech, sentence parsing, and discourse processing.
Section IV deals with learning to read, various types of reading disability, and individual differences
in reading (including speed reading).
We have written this book so that the instructor need not cover all of it in a course. Chapters 3
through 5 form the core of the book and subsequent chapters presuppose having read them.
Chapter 1, however, can be omitted or skimmed by students who have had an undergraduate
course in cognitive psychology, and Chapter 2 can be omitted or skimmed by students with a
viii Preface

background in linguistics. Chapter 6 provides a discussion of a model of eye movement control in

reading (the E-Z Reader model) and might be viewed as somewhat technical and detailed for
some readers. However, we think that for the reader interested in fully understanding our position
it is important reading. Chapters 7, 8, and 9 provide essential reading on important aspects of skilled
reading. Chapters 10 and 11 examine issues in reading development, Chapter 12 deals with dyslexia
and reading disabilities, and Chapter 13 deals with individual differences in reading (including
speed reading). Each of these sets of chapters forms a separate unit, any of which could be omitted
without disturbing continuity. Chapter 14 provides a brief overview and summation of the book.
This book is a revised and updated version of Rayner and Pollatsek (1989), which was titled The
Psychology of Reading. Many key points from the original version of the book have survived in this
new version. Obviously one big difference is that two new authors have been added. All of the
authors of the present work have read, commented, and added their voice to all of the chapters in
the book. However, in terms of initial drafts of the chapters, the assignments were as follows:

KR: Chapters 1, 4, 7, 13, 14

AP: Chapters 2, 3, 5, 6
JA: Chapters 10, 11, 12
CC: Chapters 7, 8, 9, 14

We thank Paul Dukes, our editor at Psychology Press, for his enthusiasm and encouragement to
write this book, and Mandy Collison, for her hard work and efficient handling of the production
process. We also greatly appreciate the comments that we received from reviewers. Steven Frisson,
Simon Liversedge, and Ed O’Brien reviewed the entire manuscript, and various sections of the
book were reviewed by Denis Drieghe, Barbara Foorman, Catherine McBride-Chang, Manuel
Perea, Erik Reichle, Tessa Warren, and Jinmian Yang. Likewise, comments by James Juola and Paul
van den Broeck, who reviewed the entire earlier version, and by Morton Anne Gernsbacher,
Simon Garrod, and Chuck Perfetti, who reviewed some sections of the earlier version, are also
greatly appreciated.
We hope that the citations throughout this book point to the intellectual debt we owe to other
researchers. If some references are overlooked we can only say that, like any authors, we had to pick
and choose exactly what we would cite throughout the book. It will be obvious that we rely
heavily on our own work in many instances and we apologize to colleagues if some of their work
is not discussed. We also owe a debt of gratitude to many colleagues, graduate students, and post-
doctoral fellows who have worked with us, mainly at the University of Massachusetts but also more
recently at the University of California, San Diego. Their constant intellectual stimulation has
always been central in our work.
The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the National Science
Foundation, and Microsoft have been very generous in supporting our research on reading and we
are pleased to acknowledge their support.
Finally, we owe a particular debt of gratitude to our families, and dedicate this book to them.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Keith Rayner is the Atkinson Professor of Psychology at the University of California, San Diego,
and Emeritus Distinguished University Professor at the University of Massachusetts. He has
published widely on topics related to reading, eye movements, and language processing.

Alexander Pollatsek is Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Research Professor at the

University of Massachusetts Amherst. His primary research interests are in reading, word recogni-
tion, scene perception, and driving behavior. He has published widely in each area.

Jane Ashby is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at Central Michigan University. Her primary
interests are in skilled reading, phonological processing, dyslexia, and reading development.

Charles Clifton, Jr. is Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Research Professor at the University
of Massachusetts Amherst. He is primarily interested in psycholinguistics and has published
numerous papers dealing with linguistic processing, parsing, and syntactic ambiguity.
PART I

Background Information

In the first three chapters of this book we present some information that will be necessary for you
to understand many of the points we will stress in later chapters. In Chapter 1 some key concepts
from cognitive psychology are introduced that will be used throughout the book. Cognitive
psychology is the branch of experimental psychology that is concerned with how the mind func-
tions and is structured, and in the past 40 years many cognitive psychologists have been very inter-
ested in studying how the mind works during reading. In Chapter 1 we introduce many of the
basic conceptual tools that cognitive psychologists use when they study mental processes in general,
and reading in particular.
Chapter 2 gives an overview of different writing systems that have been used or are in use
throughout the world. As in Chapter 1, we also use Chapter 2 to introduce some key concepts from
linguistics and psychology. Since the rest of the book will be dealing with the processes that result
when readers attempt to decipher the marks on the page, it is essential we have some knowledge of
the nature of the stimulus that is the starting point for all those processes. In addition, it is important
to discuss the central characteristics of different writing systems, partly to gain some insight into
written English and partly because people have misconceptions about many writing systems.
Note that we used the term processes a few times in the preceding sentences. This book is
primarily about how the mind processes information during reading—we will have virtually
nothing to say about motivational and emotional issues during reading. Our focus in this book is
on the reading process when it is going well: for skilled readers who are motivated to read, either
intrinsically or extrinsically. We assume that such skilled and motivated reading characterizes much
of reading and, as you will see, it is enough of a challenge to explain it. However, beginning reading
and certain kinds of reading disabilities will be the focus of Part IV.
Chapter 3 is one of the most important chapters in the book because there we first discuss how
words are identified. In this chapter we describe some of the work cognitive psychologists have
done to understand how isolated words are perceived, recognized, and understood. Some researchers
are critical of this work, and suggest that identifying words in isolation is quite different from
normal fluent reading. The position that we adopt (and which we will justify at various points
throughout the book) is that skilled reading involves a number of component processes, and these
component processes can be studied. That is not to say we believe that reading is merely identi-
fying individual words and stringing the meaning of the words together; the process of compre-
hending text is much more complex than that. However, a moment’s reflection should make it
2 Background information

clear that, for reading to proceed at all efficiently, we must be able to recognize and understand the
meaning of most (if not all) of the individual words that we encounter. In later sections of this book
we explore the processes of recognizing words and understanding sentences in normal reading.
The background information we present in this first section of this book will help you understand
the complex information-processing activities that occur when you read and understand text.
1
INTRODUCTION AND PRELIMINARY
INFORMATION

Reading is a complex skill that is pretty much taken for granted by those who can do it. About
35 years ago (when cognitive psychologists first became interested in studying reading) one of the
authors, then a graduate student, got into an elevator in the Engineering Department at a famous
university in the northeastern part of the United States with a copy of Smith’s book Understanding
Reading (1971) under his arm. A bright young freshman engineering student, upon seeing the
book, was quick to remark: “Oh, reading; I learned how to do that 15 years ago.” That remark is
pretty consistent with most people’s attitudes about reading. Those who can do it take it for
granted.Yet it is an extremely complicated process that is sometimes difficult to learn (particularly
in comparison to the ease with which children learn to speak). And illiterate adults find attempts
to learn to read agonizingly frustrating.
Anyone reading this book is likely to be familiar with 30,000 or more words and can generally
recognize most of them within a fraction of a second. A skilled reader can do this despite the fact
that letters that make up the words are often printed in different type fonts. In the case of hand-
written letters a reader can still read and comprehend despite rather dramatic differences in style
and legibility. In being able to read and identify words in spite of all this variability, a skilled reader
is able to perform a feat that is well beyond the capability of the most powerful computer programs
available today. But this is not all. Skilled readers can identify words that have different meanings in
different contexts. Consider the use of the word boxer in the following two sentences:

John knew the boxer was angry when he started barking at him. (1.1)

John knew the boxer was angry when he started yelling at him. (1.2)

These two sentences are identical except for a single word which disambiguates the appropriate
meaning of the word boxer. The most common meaning for boxer is a dog. Since dogs bark
and people don’t, boxer in sentence 1.1 clearly refers to a dog. Likewise, in sentence 1.2 the
fact that the boxer is yelling leads us to believe that the sentence is referring to a person. If you are
very observant, you may have noticed that there are actually two ambiguities in sentences 1.1 and
1.2. Not only is the word boxer ambiguous, the pronoun he is also ambiguous. Most of the time, in
sentences like 1.1 and 1.2, we associate the pronoun with the most recent antecedent. But if the
sentence read
4 Background information

The boxer scared John when he started yelling at him. (1.3)

we would most likely associate the pronoun with John.Yet notice even here that it is not completely
clear who he is. If we replace the word scared with the word attacked we would probably understand
the sentence quite differently.
The point of this discussion is that we can easily understand the meaning of these different
sentences despite the fact that individual words have more than one meaning and pronouns can
refer to more than one referent. Coupled with this fact is the observation that we can easily under-
stand puns, idioms, and metaphors. For example:

John thought the billboard was a wart on the landscape. (1.4)

Here none of us would believe that the literal meaning of the word wart was intended. We quite
easily understand the sentence to mean that the billboard was ugly and spoiled the scene. And, just
as we can easily comprehend the metaphor in sentence 1.4, so the idiomatic nature of

John hit the nail on the head with his answer. (1.5)

presents a difficulty only for non-native readers of English who attempt a literal interpretation of
the sentence and find it nonsensical. Thus, skilled readers are very good at combining the meanings
of individual words to derive the meaning of sentences and paragraphs and short passages and
books. Readers can draw inferences by relying on what they already know to help understand text,
and from reading words they can form images of scenes and appreciate poetry.
We have been arguing that the feats of a skilled reader are truly impressive. Very powerful
computers cannot do what a skilled reader can do; such machines (or more specifically the programs
that run on them), despite tremendous memory capacity, would fail on many of the tasks we have
mentioned that a skilled reader handles almost effortlessly. How do skilled readers accomplish this
complex task? And how is the skill acquired? These are the central questions of this book. For the
most part we will focus on the skilled reader in attempting to explain the process of reading. Our
primary rationale is that we must understand the skill itself before we can understand how it is
acquired, and our primary orientation in this book is a cognitive psychology/information-
processing point of view (i.e., understanding the component mechanisms underlying reading). In
the remainder of this chapter we attempt to place the rest of the book into perspective. We will
do this by first discussing how researchers have historically viewed reading. Then we will present
an overview of the human information-processing system, discussing what types of processing
mechanisms may be involved in reading. First, however, we briefly discuss our perspective of
reading—that of a cognitive psychologist.

What is cognitive psychology?

Cognitive psychology is the branch of experimental psychology that studies how the mind works.
Cognitive psychologists are interested in a wide range of mental activities from attention to
memory to language to learning concepts to decision making. Within the cognitive psychologist’s
toolbox there are a number of tools that are used to try and investigate the topic of interest.
Foremost among these tools are what are now generally referred to as behavioral experiments; this
term is usually used in contrast to brain-imaging studies. In behavioral experiments people (referred
to as participants) are asked to perform some kind of task. The amount of time that it takes
them to complete the task (or respond to a stimulus), and the response they actually make (and its
 Introduction 5

accuracy), are typically measured. We will discuss various types of response time tasks relevant for
reading in Chapter 3, but at this point we only want to alert you to the general technique. In brain-
imaging studies, which have become very popular in the last 20 years or so, participants are asked
to perform some type of task while correlates of neural activity in their brains are measured. The
third main tool used by cognitive psychologists is that of producing computer simulations of the
issue of interest. As we will see, a number of models or computer simulations that are relevant to
understanding reading have appeared within the last few years.
We will extensively discuss behavioral techniques and the results of computational modeling
throughout the book, but will briefly introduce brain-imaging techniques here (for a good
overview, see Dehaene, 2009). Currently, two general types of measurement of brain activity
are employed. Two of these techniques, positron emission tomography (PET) and functional
magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), are good at localizing where in the brain certain
activities occur, but their temporal resolution is not very precise. They both measure the
hemodynamic response, the increase in blood flow to active neurons in the brain. This
response occurs over an approximate span of 6 seconds, varying across individuals. As we will
see later, many of the important processes involved in reading occur within 250 milliseconds
(or one quarter of a second), well beyond the temporal resolution of fMRI and other blood-
flow-based brain-imaging techniques. Still, such studies have contributed valuable information
about the location of the neural circuits involved in reading and are beginning to examine
the neural bases of reading disorders, such as dyslexia (see Frost et al., 2009, for a review).
Other neurophysiological measures have a millisecond temporal resolution fine enough for
studying reading processes. Electroencephalography (EEG) measures changes in electrical poten-
tials at the scalp that result when large networks of neurons prepare to fire in response to a stimulus.
These event-related potentials (ERPs) reflect brain activity from the start of a task (e.g., word
recognition), providing a continuous, online measure of the time course of cognitive processes as
they unfold. Arguably the most complex brain-imaging technology is magnetoencephalography
(MEG), which measures the magnetic consequences of electrical activity in the brain to offer not
only fine-grained temporal resolution, but also high spatial resolution, which enables the
localization of neural activity to particular areas in the brain. MEG studies have contributed novel
findings about the location and time course of brain activity during word reading (see Halderman,
Ashby, & Perfetti, in press, for a review). However, the highly sophisticated data acquisition and
modeling techniques that MEG requires necessarily limit its use. As informative as these methods
are, most of what is known about the complex processes involved in reading has been discovered
in carefully controlled behavioral experiments. Thus, most of the research we discuss in this book
is behavioral research.

Historical overview of reading research

The roots of cognitive psychology can be traced to the establishment of Wundt’s laboratory in
Leipzig in 1879. Workers in Wundt’s laboratory were keenly interested in questions related to
memory, perception, and action. Shortly thereafter there was considerable interest in the process of
reading, which reached its apex with the publication of Huey’s (1908) The Psychology and Pedagogy
of Reading. A perusal of the chapters in the first part of his book (the part dealing with the
psychology of reading) will reveal that the chapters bear a remarkable similarity to the topics
covered in the present volume and most other modern books dealing with the psychology of
reading. Huey and his contemporaries were interested in eye movements in reading, the nature of
the perceptual span (how much information can be perceived during a fixation of the eye), word
recognition processes, inner speech, reading comprehension, and reading rate. Huey’s marvelously
6 Background information

cogent and concise description of his findings and those of his contemporaries prior to 1908 is still
a joy to read. Many of the basic facts we know about eye movements during reading were discov-
ered by Huey and contemporaries using cumbersome and seemingly archaic techniques in
comparison to the sophisticated devices currently available to record eye movements during
reading. Yet their discoveries have stood the test of time and have held up when replicated using
more accurate recording systems. A contemporary of Huey, the French oculist, Emile Javal, first
noted that during reading our eyes do not move smoothly across the page as our phenomeno-
logical impressions would imply. Rather our eyes make a series of jumps (or saccades in French)
along the line. Between the jumps the eyes remain relatively still, for about a quarter of a second,
in what is referred to as a fixation.
In order to study how much information can be perceived in a single eye fixation, the tachisto-
scope was devised. The t-scope (as it is often called) is a device that allows an experimenter to control
how much information is presented to a participant, as well as the duration of the exposure.
The t-scope is now largely a historical relic, as it has been supplanted by high-speed computers
with millisecond control. However, by varying the amount of information available in the
t-scope and by presenting it for a brief duration (to preclude any eye movement), early researchers
hoped to infer the size of the perceptual span or the area of effective vision during a fixation. Huey’s
book also describes classic experiments by Cattell (1886) and by Erdmann and Dodge (1898) on
word recognition and two full chapters in the book are devoted to the role of inner speech in reading.
Huey’s lucid observations on inner speech and word recognition processes have largely stood the test
of time.
Work related to the cognitive processes involved in reading continued for a few years after the
publication of Huey’s book. However, serious work by psychologists on the reading process pretty
much came to a halt a few years after 1913. In that year the behaviorist revolution in experimental
psychology began. According to behaviorist doctrine, the only things worthy of study by experi-
mental psychologists were activities that could be seen, observed, and measured. Since cognitive
processes involved in skilled reading cannot be observed and directly measured, interest in reading
waned. To be sure, some well-known investigations of eye movements during reading by Buswell
and Tinker were carried out between 1920 and 1960, but for the most part their work dealt with
purely peripheral components of reading. That is, eye movements can be seen and directly
measured, and were by Buswell and Tinker, but attempts to relate the activity of the eye to activity
of the mind were virtually non-existent.
In essence, work on the cognitive processes associated with reading came to a standstill in the
1920s and did not begin again until the 1960s. Small wonder then that when Huey’s book was
republished in 1968 it seemed so relevant! We hadn’t learned a whole lot more about the cognitive
processes involved in reading in the 60 years between the initial publication of the work and the
second appearance of the book. In addition to the work on eye movements during reading by
researchers such as Buswell and Tinker, some work on reading did continue during the interval in
question. But most of this work was conducted in Schools of Education where the primary focus
is generally on more applied aspects of reading. Thus there was work on the most appropriate
method to teach reading, and many of the standardized reading tests still in existence today were
developed during that period. However, work on the mental processes associated with reading was
almost non-existent.
Today many psychologists are interested in reading. Why did this change take place? The
primary reason appears to have been the failure of behaviorism to account for language processing
in any reasonable way. The promise of behaviorism was always that if psychologists could under-
stand the laws of learning and behavior in simple tasks (like knee jerks and eye blinks), those laws
would be generalizable to more complex tasks like language processing. In 1957, B. F. Skinner
 Introduction 7

decided it was high time that the behaviorists produced on this promise, and he published Verbal
Behavior, which was an account of language from a behaviorist viewpoint. The linguist Noam
Chomsky (1959) wrote a scathing review not only of the book, but of behaviorism in general. In
essence, Chomsky argued that behaviorist principles could not account for language learning or
language processes in general. Around that same time, he also published Syntactic Structures (1957),
which was a radical departure from traditional linguistic theory. In that work he suggested that the
study of language and the mind are intimately related, and he presented an elegant theory of
grammar. Many psychologists, disillusioned with behaviorism, became very interested in the rela-
tionship between Chomsky’s theories of language and work on cognitive processes was underway
after a hiatus of over 40 years.
A number of other factors contributed to the re-emergence of the study of cognitive processes
around 1960. However, they are beyond the scope of our current discussion. Out of the burgeoning
interest in language processes in general, interest in the reading process began once again around
1970. Since the mid-1960s numerous scholarly journals dealing with cognitive processes and
human experimental psychology have been founded and nearly every issue of these journals
contains at least one article related to reading. In addition, a number of textbooks dealing with
reading appeared starting around 1985. Clearly there is now considerable interest among cognitive
psychologists in studying reading.
Cognitive psychologists studying reading approach the issue from slightly different perspectives.
Some have a background rooted in perception research and see the study of word recognition,
for example, as a means to study perceptual processes or pattern recognition using well-defined
stimuli. Others approach the study of reading with a background in memory processes and
verbal learning theory, or a background in linguistics. They tend to approach the study of
reading by examining comprehension processes. Still others are interested in reading in and of itself
because they believe, as Huey pointed out over 100 years ago, that to understand what the mind
does during reading would be “the acme of a psychologist’s achievements, since it would be to
describe very many of the most intricate workings of the human mind, as well as to unravel the
tangled story of the most remarkable specific performance that civilization has learned” (Huey,
1908, p. 6).
It is our contention that this diversity of interests and backgrounds is healthy and can easily
be accommodated within the information-processing approach because it views reading as a
highly complex process relying on a number of sub-processes. Thus it is unlikely that there will be
a single insight that will answer all of the questions about a complex skill like reading. Rather,
breakthroughs will come from researchers working on different sub-components of the reading
process. This is not to say that all of the information obtained by cognitive psychologists will not
need to be put together, for it will. Rather, it provides a clear justification for examining different
component processes of a complex skill.
Critics of the information-processing approach often argue that attempts to isolate component
processes of reading result in tasks very unlike real reading. For example, to study word recognition
processes cognitive psychologists often present a word for a very brief duration (say 50 milliseconds,
one-twentieth of a second). A participant in such an experiment may be asked to pronounce the
word or make some type of decision about it (Is it a word? Does it belong to a certain category of
things? Is it larger than a breadbox?). In making decisions about the word, participants push one
button for a yes response and another for a no response. Admittedly these tasks are unlike reading.
Yet, to respond appropriately, participants may well be using the same processing mechanisms that
they use during reading. Perhaps an analogy will help. Suppose we’re interested in studying
walking. If we study the motor responses that people make when they take two steps, critics may say
“But that’s not walking. When you walk you go a long way.” True, but are the motor responses
8 Background information

different when you take two steps? Not completely! What cognitive psychologists strive to do is set
up experiments in which the same processing mechanisms are used in the task derived as in
reading—sometimes more successfully than others. In the chapters in this book, as with our prior
book, we will place the greatest weight on those kinds of experiments that most closely match the
task of reading.
It is important to point out that the primary methodology of the cognitive psychologist is empir-
ical experimentation. Theories and models of processes such as reading are also critically important
because they help to formulate the kinds of research questions to be asked. But the ultimate test is
always an experiment in which contrasting theoretical positions are tested against each other.
Sometimes research is undertaken purely for information-gathering purposes (so as to form the
groundwork for a model or theory). The point is that what we will take as evidence is not simply
somebody or other’s idea or intuition, but data obtained in well-controlled experiments. With these
points in mind we now turn to a description of the human information-processing system.

Overview of the human information-processing system

In this section we will present an overview of the traditional view of the human information-
processing system. We provide a stage analysis, but we caution you that not all cognitive psycholo-
gists would agree with the notion of distinct stages. Indeed, the best way to describe the human
information-processing system has always been somewhat controversial (for some alternative
perspectives see Anderson, 1976; Broadbent, 1984; Craik & Lockhart, 1972; McClelland
& Rumelhart, 1986; Rumelhart & McClelland, 1986). The type of model that we will present
consists of three distinct stages of processing (sensory store, short-term memory, and long-term
memory) in a more or less passive system. We focus on phenomena and analyses that have stood
the test of time, and overlook many current debates in cognitive psychology, since our primary
intention is to give the flavor of the information-processing approach and to introduce termi-
nology that virtually all cognitive psychologists use (modern textbooks, such as Eysenck & Keane,
2010, provide current overviews). In addition, some of the controversy over details is peripheral to
understanding reading.
Figure 1.1 shows an example of a typical stage model of the human information-processing
system. It consists of three stages, and each stage has distinct functions and characteristics. However,
prior to discussing such a system, we must discuss something about the initial sensory registration
of printed words by the eyes and subsequent pattern recognition processes.

FIGURE 1.1 A simple overview of the human information-processing system

 Introduction 9

The retina and visual acuity

Vision depends on a pair of specialized organs (the eyes) whose neural receptors can be thought of as
being a part of the brain that has extended outside of the cortex. Patterns of light falling on the sensory
neurons in the retina result in the sensation of seeing. When you look at a page of text (like the one
you are currently reading), you are not able to see all of the words on the page equally well. This is
because of acuity limitations. In terms of acuity, a horizontal line of text falling on the retina can be
divided into three regions: foveal, parafoveal, and peripheral. The foveal area subtends about 2 degrees
of visual angle around your fixation point (the specific location that your eyes are centered on); the
parafoveal area subtends about 10 degrees of visual angle around fixation (5 degrees to the left and right
beyond the fixation point); the peripheral area includes everything on the line of text beyond the
parafoveal region. Acuity is greatest in the center of vision (the fovea) and drops off markedly in the
parafovea and even more so in the periphery. This is because of the anatomical structure of the retina.
The retina is composed of two types of receptors called rods and cones. The fovea consists almost
entirely of cones. With increasing distance from the fovea, the density of cones decreases and the
density of rods increases. Thus the peripheral region of the retina is composed entirely of rods.
The parafovea contains a mixture of rods and cones. These two types of receptors serve dramati-
cally different functions. The cones are specialized for processing detail and for acuity. In addition
to permitting fine discrimination of detail, cones also serve in the discrimination of wavelengths or
hue. The rods, on the other hand, are specialized for detecting movement and permit discrimina-
tion of brightness or shades of gray. The rods are particularly important for night vision; when
you enter a dark room, at first you feel as if you cannot see anything. However, after a short while
(unless the room is totally dark) your rods adapt and you can see.
The most important point to be gleaned from the description of rods and cones is that the
acuity necessary for discriminating fine detail (as is necessary in reading) is available only in the
center of vision. A simple experiment can demonstrate this quite clearly. If a word or letter string
briefly appeared on a video monitor of a computer, and you were asked to say what word (or
letters) appeared there, your accuracy in doing so would decrease as the stimulus was presented
further from your point of fixation. In the experiment the stimulus is presented briefly enough
(about 150 milliseconds or less) that it is virtually impossible for you to move your eyes to look
directly at it. Figure 1.2 shows how performance in such a task would depend on how close to

FIGURE 1.2 Relative density of cones (solid line) and rods (dashed line) across the visual field. Dotted
line shows the accuracy of identifying a target word exposed briefly to the right or left of fixation
10 Background information

fixation the stimulus was presented. We have also plotted on the figure the relative distribution of
rods and cones in the retina. Note that the accuracy function in our experiment is very similar to
the distribution of cones in the retina. The purpose of this demonstration is to convince you that,
in order to discriminate the fine details of letters and words as we read, we must move our eyes so
as to place the fovea over that part of the text which we want to read.

Pattern recognition processes

After we move our eyes so as to place the fovea on the word or words that we want to read, pattern
recognition begins. Actually the pattern recognition process for a word may have begun on the
prior fixation when the word was in parafoveal vision, as we shall see in Chapter 4. What we are
concerned with in this section is how the brain goes about recognizing the letters and words which
must be processed for us to read. To take a simple example, how do we recognize the printed letter
“A”? Two major theories of pattern recognition have been proposed (for a recent discussion see
Grainger, Rey, & Dufau, 2008). The first, template matching theory, suggests that we have stored in
our brains a representation of every pattern that we can recognize. Thus we recognize the letter A
by comparing the pattern of excitation from the cells in the retina to a template stored in memory.
If there is a match between representation and the stimulus, the letter A is perceived.
While template matching theory works quite well in computer pattern recognition devices that
read letters and digits in highly constrained contexts, such as the digits that specify the code
number on your checking account checks, it is well known (Crowder, 1982; Neisser, 1967) that
such a system would fail to recognize instances of the letter A that were slightly deviant with
respect to shape, size, or orientation, as Figure 1.3 shows. The major problem for the theory in its
most rigid form is that it suggests we have a template for every variation of every pattern we are

FIGURE 1.3 Illustration of the difficulties with a simple template-matching system for character
recognition. (After Neisser, 1967.)
 Introduction 11

able to recognize. The simple pattern for the letter A, for example, can appear (as we mentioned
earlier) in a number of different type fonts and handwriting variations.Yet we are able to recognize
it quite easily. It seems unwieldy to think that we have so many patterns stored in our head.
One way to make the template matching theory more workable is to assume that, before
comparisons of new input to a stored comparison take place, the input is “cleaned up” or normal-
ized. The normalization process would separate essential information in the stimulus from most
non-essential information. For example, variations in size could be taken care of before compari-
sons to a template occurred by transforming all images to a standard size. Accounting for variations
in orientation prior to the matching process also seems quite reasonable. It is somewhat harder to
understand how the normalization process would fill in missing gaps and eliminate fuzzy squiggles
(as in handwriting) that are irrelevant to recognizing the pattern as the letter A.
While the normalization process gives plausibility to the template matching theory, the second
theory, feature detection theory, is more parsimonious in accounting for how the pattern recognition
process deals with such variation, and is generally considered to be a more viable account. The
starting point for feature detection theory is the idea that there are many common elements for
letters (consisting of horizontal, vertical, oblique, and curved lines) and that we analyze these compo-
nent elements in recognizing a pattern. The letters C and G and the letters O and Q, for example,
have a great deal of similarity and featural overlap. The distinguishing feature between the C and G
is the horizontal line that is present in the G, but not in the C. The distinguishing feature between
the O and Q is the oblique line present in the Q, but absent in the O. According to feature detection
theory, when a letter is analyzed the first step is to prepare a list of its features and this list is compared
with the list stored in memory. This process then is analytical in that we put together the different
elements of the pattern until recognition occurs. Template matching theory, on the other hand, is
more of a holistic process. As we implied above, the feature detection theory is considerably less
cumbersome since the analytic processes would rely on a small number of features that are common
to all type fonts (the distinguishing feature for C versus G remains invariant over different type fonts
and handwriting styles), rather than having a different template for each style of print.
What type of evidence is there for feature detection theory? Three types are consistent with the
theory: (1) physiological data from animals, (2) stabilized image research, and (3) visual search data.
The best-known physiological evidence in favor of feature detection theory comes from work by
Hubel and Wiesel (1962) on the visual system of the cat. Via electrical recordings, Hubel and
Wiesel were able to examine the rate of firing of individual cells in the visual system as a function
of what the cat was looking at. The most important finding from their work for our purposes is
that they demonstrated that cortical cells in the visual system fired differentially depending on the
stimulus. Cells that were specifically responsive to different visual shapes—line, edge, and slit detec-
tors, as well as more complex detectors—were all discovered. It is easy to generalize from these
results (although it should be done cautiously) and suggest that there are likewise feature detectors
in humans specialized for firing when the various horizontal, vertical, oblique, and curved lines
making up the letters of our alphabet fall in front of our eyes.
In a stabilized image experiment an image can be kept at the same place on the retina (via some
rather sophisticated technology), so that to whatever extent the eyes move, the stimulus moves a corre-
sponding amount in the same direction. Even when we are asked to hold our eyes very still, there is a
slight movement or tremor of the eyes (called nystagmus). The stabilized image technique, however,
keeps the stimulus on the same retinal location. Apparently, nystagmus is important for perception
because under these conditions perception gradually blanks out so that the observer no longer sees
the stimulus. If light remains in the same place on the retina, the cells in that location become fatigued
and stop firing, and perception of the stimulus ceases. Movement of a stimulus or movement of
the eyes will place a stimulus at a new location on the retina, resulting in new neural firing. What is
12 Background information

interesting is that when the image is stabilized, perception does not blank out instantaneously. Rather,
it is gradual. Coherent parts, including lines sharing the same orientation, disappear at the same time,
as depicted in Figure 1.4. But the manner in which the stimulus fades is inconsistent with a template
theory, and provides evidence for the importance of features at various levels of abstraction.
The third line of evidence for feature detection theory is the work on visual search originated
by Neisser (1967). Figure 1.5 shows sample stimuli in the task. Participants are asked to find the
target letter Z. It turns out that the letter Z is much easier to find (participants are over twice as

FIGURE 1.4 Perceptual fragmentation in “stopped images.” The figures on the left are stimulus patterns;
the others are typical products of fragmentation. (From Pritchard 1961.)

FIGURE 1.5 Neisser’s visual search task. A display is exposed and the subject must scan vertically,
from top to bottom, until finding a target site. Time to reach the target is recorded as a function of the
position of the target
 Introduction 13

fast) in the middle column than in either of the other columns. The reason, of course, is that the
distractor letters in the middle column are all letters that are quite dissimilar to the target and do
not share many features with it. Template matching theory would suggest that there should be no
difference between the columns since the number of matches that must be made would be equiv-
alent in each. However, feature detection theory can account for the result since virtually the same
set of feature detector cells would be firing when the distractors are confusable whether or not the
target letter was present. On the other hand, when the target is embedded in dissimilar letters, the
cells that fire for the letter Z will only fire when the target is present.
While there are criticisms of feature detection as a theory of object perception in general, it
provides a reasonably satisfactory model of how letters and words are processed. One issue that we
have not discussed, which will become relevant in a later chapter, is whether pattern recognition
processes occur in a serial or parallel manner. If information is analyzed serially, the pattern recogni-
tion processes occur one at a time. Thus, in Neisser’s visual search task, feature analysis would occur
for one letter and when it was complete would begin on the next and so on. If information is
analyzed in parallel, the sensory information from various spatial locations is analyzed simultane-
ously. Thus, within acuity limits, all of the letters in each row in Figure 1.5 would be analyzed at
once. The experiments on word identification that we will discuss in Chapter 3 also argue for
parallel processing of letters within words. However, we will argue that serial processing is also
important and occurs frequently in reading. Indeed, we will argue that words are identified serially
as we read. In particular, we don’t process the meaning of word n+1 (the word to the right of fixa-
tion) until we have processed the meaning of word n (the currently fixated word).
In this section we have argued that the pattern recognition processes that operate on print can
best be conceptualized in terms of feature-analytic processes. We return now to a more detailed
examination of the information-processing system depicted in Figure 1.1.

The sensory store

The lowest level in the information-processing system is generally referred to as the sensory store.
For auditory information, the store is referred to as echoic memory (for a discussion see Cowan,
1984). For visual information, the store is referred to as iconic memory. Iconic memory is considered
to be a temporary and transient memory store in which much of the information physically avail-
able in the stimulus is still available after the display has gone off.
In one of the most widely cited experiments in cognitive psychology, Sperling (1960) demon-
strated the existence of a visual sensory store. He presented participants with three rows of four
letters each for a brief duration (say 50 milliseconds or one-twentieth of a second). In a control
condition participants were instructed to report as many of the letters as possible, and the average
number of letters reported was 4.5. In the experimental conditions Sperling used a partial report
technique in which he cued participants as to which row they should report. Thus if, after the
display went off, participants heard a high-pitch tone they were to report the top row, a medium
tone the middle row, and a low pitch the bottom row. The tone was presented at various delays
after the disappearance of the letters from the screen. Sometimes the tone occurred simultaneously
with the offset of the letters and sometimes it occurred up to a second after the letters disappeared.
Sperling’s reasoning was that if we have an iconic memory (although he did not call it such), we
should be able to use the cue to “read out” the letters from the cued row. If the tone actually occurred
prior to the onset of the letters, then we would be able to use that information to focus on the
relevant row. Sperling’s question was whether or not we can use the cue to examine information after
it has physically disappeared from before our eyes. If so, then we must have an iconic memory in
which all or most of the information present in the stimulus is still available. In fact, what Sperling
14 Background information

found was that participants could report on average 3.3 letters from the row that was signaled. Since
the participants had no way of knowing beforehand which row was going to be signaled, it must be
the case that participants could get roughly 3.3 letters from each of the rows, which means that they
must have had approximately 10 letters available in their memory system.
Keep in mind that when participants in the control condition were asked to report as many letters
from the display as they could, they averaged 4.5 letters. How do we account for the discrepancy
between the cued partial report trials and the whole report condition? If we assume that iconic
memory has a large capacity (say 10 letters from a 3 × 4 array) for a very short duration (perhaps a
quarter of a second), and that the rate at which people can “read out” letters is slow (say 3 to 5 letters
in a quarter of a second), then the discrepancy can be explained. If the letters are taken from the whole
display, performance is limited by the “read out” process. On the other hand, if the tone cues the
participants that only one row is relevant, then the participant has time to “read out” most of that row.
Since Sperling’s demonstration there have been literally hundreds of experiments investigating
the characteristics of iconic memory. This research has revealed that the primary characteristics of
iconic memory are that (1) it has a large capacity, (2) it has a duration of roughly a quarter of a
second, (3) it is pre-categorical (it stores physical form, not meaningful objects), (4) it is interfered
with by new information, and (5) the “read out” rate is relatively slow.
The status and function of iconic memory have been highly debatable for some time (see
Coltheart, 1980; Haber, 1983; Turvey, 1977). Some workers in the field have argued that it is an
epiphenomenon of the highly sterile and controlled experimental laboratory; after all, when does
a stimulus appear before our eyes for a fraction of a second only to disappear completely? Such
individuals tend to argue that iconic memory, like our appendix, has no functional utility. Others
would argue that all biological mechanisms are adaptive and just because we do not know for
certain what function the icon serves, does not mean that it does not have a role in processing.
With respect to reading, it is not at all clear what function iconic memory might serve. Clearly,
participants in iconic memory experiments are not reading in the sense that we would normally
think of reading. In reading, the stimulus does not disappear from in front of our eyes after only a
brief exposure (unless perhaps we try reading in a lightning storm or we are participants in “disap-
pearing text” experiments, which we will describe in Chapters 4 and 5). At one time it was
thought that something like an iconic memory might play a role in integrating visual information
across the eye movements we make during reading. We will discuss that idea in Chapter 4, but to
anticipate that discussion slightly the available evidence argues against such a conclusion. Indeed,
the fact that we make eye movements so frequently is a problem for the utility of iconic memory
in reading. Recall that the duration of iconic memory is roughly a quarter of a second, which is
about the rate at which we make eye movements in reading. Given that information in iconic
memory is disrupted by new information, and that eye movements occur at the rate they do, plus
the fact that the information we want to read is available to us continuously (we can always look
back with our eyes), it does not seem that iconic memory plays any role in reading.
At this point you may be asking yourself: If iconic memory plays no role in reading, why was it
discussed in such detail? Indeed, why was it discussed at all? There are two reasons why we troubled
to present the details of iconic memory. First, our primary purpose in this section is to present an
overview of the human information-processing system. Earlier information-processing models of
the reading process (Gough, 1972; Mackworth, 1972; Massaro, 1975; Mitchell, 1982) utilized the
concept of iconic memory as the initial stage of registration of visual information during reading.
Recall that we argued that at this point we are not so concerned about the extent to which the
different stages are accurate and useful in understanding reading; they are presented more to give
you a flavor for the approach. This brings us to our second reason for discussing iconic memory
in such detail: the notion of buffers (or temporary storage units) in information processing turns out
 Introduction 15

to be highly useful. Actually, the icon is little more than a buffer in which information is held for
some later processing activity. The short life of the icon in fact suggests that the visual features of
the print are of little use once the eyes are no longer looking at them. As we shall see later, the
notion of a buffer has been very useful in various types of research related to the reading process.
Hopefully, by discussing iconic memory in such detail, you will have a sense for how such a
concept may be useful in designing experiments and theorizing about reading.
To summarize, iconic memory is the initial stage in an information-processing model. It is
highly transient, but with a large capacity. We have also argued that its usefulness for understanding
reading is limited since the stimulus is always available to us in reading. However, the concept of a
buffer-like store has been very useful in experiments related to the reading process.

Short-term memory
According to the standard view of the information-processing system, the transient nature of iconic
memory requires us to get information registered by the sense organs into a more permanent repre-
sentation. The structure that contains this representation is short-term memory (or STM). Considerable
information is lost before it can be transferred to STM because the “read out” rate from iconic
memory is quite slow. However, a certain amount of information is transferred to STM. But STM has
problems of its own. First, and most importantly, it has a limited capacity. The capacity of STM is
about seven plus or minus two items (Miller, 1956). Notice that we said items, not letters, words, or
digits. Indeed, we can learn to short-circuit to some extent the limited capacity of short-term memory
by various types of chunking strategies. If we say the number 967835241 to you, and ask you to recall it
in the same order that it was presented, then if you treat each individual digit as an item you will have
a difficult time recalling it. Quite simply, for most people, STM will be overloaded. However, if you
treat the number as three 3-digit numbers (967-835-241), then you will most likely be able to recall
the number with 100% accuracy. Another way that we deal with the capacity limitation of STM is
via a process called rehearsal. When you look up a telephone number in the phone book, you often
find yourself repeating (rehearsing) it over and over to yourself (often silently, but sometimes aloud)
so that you won’t forget it. Such a strategy is another way to hold information in STM.
Notice also that we said you often repeat the number over to yourself silently. For a long time
it was considered that STM was exclusively an acoustic store. That is, even information coming in
the visual modality was assumed to be recoded into acoustic or auditory information. The reason
for this was that the kinds of errors that participants make in recalling information in STM tended
to be related acoustically, not visually, to the information actually presented. We now know that
there are visual and semantic codes in STM. Still, for linguistic stimuli, short-term memory is
primarily acoustic, as evidenced by the fact that we try and remember phone numbers from the
telephone book by rehearsing them subvocally. This aspect of short-term memory turns out to be
particularly important for understanding the role of subvocal or inner speech in reading.
The fact that we engage in various strategies (some of them unconscious) to short circuit the
limited capacity of STM has led some workers to talk about a working memory (Baddeley & Hitch,
1974) rather than a passive store. That is, short-term memory can be considered a flexible work-
space whose limited capacity can be allocated to either storage or processing. Information in STM
can remain there as long as it is being worked on. Working memory, in the sense of a flexible
workspace for processing, is also heavily involved in reading. Words are integrated in this memory,
and as we shall see later, comprehension processes are initiated here.
To summarize, short-term memory has a limited capacity. However, we can hold items there for
long periods of time via rehearsal. We also develop efficient strategies for dealing with the limited
capacity. STM is also primarily acoustic in nature. Whereas iconic memory was argued to have
16 Background information

limited usefulness in understanding reading processes, the characteristics of short-term memory

may be important in understanding inner speech in reading and comprehension processes.

Long-term memory
The rate at which we can set up programs to transfer information from STM to long-term memory (or
LTM) is relatively slow in relation to the rate at which new information enters STM, Because of this,
considerable information is lost. However, it is generally believed that once information enters LTM
it is stored there permanently. Patients under a local anesthetic whose brain is electrically stimulated
can remember things they long since thought they had forgotten, and even relive memories of events
that occurred a long while in the past (Penfield & Roberts, 1959). Information in LTM is not orga-
nized in a haphazard fashion. Indeed, LTM is highly organized and much of the material that we
cannot retrieve has been mislaid, not lost. Thus the major problem with LTM is getting the appro-
priate retrieval key to access information stored there. This is not surprising given the vast amount
of new information we process and store in LTM each day. In addition there is evidence that the new
information we learn interferes with our ability to retrieve previously stored information. Likewise,
information already stored in LTM can interfere with retrieving newly learned information.
Many cognitive psychologists find it useful to distinguish two types of long-term memory:
episodic memory and semantic memory (Tulving, 1972). Episodic memory is the memory for sequences
of events in your life. Semantic memory, which is more important for understanding reading,
contains the general knowledge you have. A part of semantic memory that is important for reading
is the lexicon (which is like a dictionary in your head). The lexicon, which like LTM itself is highly
organized, contains the meanings of the 30,000 or more words that you know. The goal of most
reading is to understand something new and to store the gist of it in LTM. In order to do so
involves processing the meanings of the words we know, or accessing our lexicon in LTM. Further,
to understand idioms, metaphors, and the like, we have to use general world knowledge that we
have stored there. And, when authors are a bit vague, we must make inferences based on what we
already know to understand their point.

Selection of information
An issue relating to the conceptual framework that we have presented is how information is
selected to be passed on to the next stage of processing. In vision, of course, the eyes are a major
device for selection.You point your eyes at those stimuli you want to process and turn your back
on those you want to ignore (metaphorically speaking!). However, as we discussed earlier, this overt
selection process is not all-or-none: while stimuli seen in extrafoveal vision are processed less well
than those in foveal vision, they are processed.
However, pointing the eyes is not the only selectional mechanism in vision. In our discussion of
Sperling’s experiments we tacitly assumed that there was a selection process which could help
“read out” the appropriate row of letters. A great deal of research has documented the reality of
such a covert mechanism of spatial attention. In essence, human and animal participants can respond
to visual stimuli more quickly and accurately if they are cued as to where in extrafoveal vision these
stimuli will be, even when they do not move their eyes (Posner, 1980). Furthermore, the locus of
this attentional system in the brain is becoming increasingly well understood. We will return to
these selectional issues in the context of reading in Chapters 4 through 6.
In contrast to the above attentional mechanisms, the processes by which information is selected
to go to LTM (or is made more retrievable from LTM) are less well understood. Clearly,
factors such as your motivation to remember the material, the length of time it is in STM, and the
 Introduction 17

meaningfulness of the material all affect how well you will remember it later. We will touch on
these issues again when we discuss comprehension of discourse in Chapter 9.

The concept of processing stages

An assumption of the model we have outlined above is that there are discrete processing stages.
That is, it is assumed that information is processed in one stage, and only when that processing is
completed is the information shipped on to the next stage. This assumption underlies a great deal
of cognitive psychology because processing will be much easier to study if it can be broken down
into simpler components.
Sternberg (1969) proposed a widely used test to determine whether such a stage notion is valid.
The test assumes that the dependent variable used to study mental processing is response time, or
the time between the presentation of a stimulus and the time to execute a response. We can best
explain the idea with an example from Sternberg’s experiment. He used a memory search task in
which participants were initially given a memory set (1 to 6 digits) to hold in memory, and then they
had to indicate if a probe digit (which was presented visually) was in the memory set. His finding
was that the time to determine whether the probe digit matched one of the items in the memory
set increased linearly as the memory set got bigger. In fact, the time increased by about 40 milli-
seconds with each additional memory set item, suggesting that it took participants 40 milliseconds
to compare each additional memory item with the probe.
Thus a measurable search process appears to be occurring in STM. What would happen if the
probe digit was presented in “visual noise” (i.e., embedded in a lot of random dots so that it was
harder to see)? If we view the process of identifying the digit as a stage prior to searching STM,
then the digit should take longer to identify when presented in noise, but the rate of search in STM
should be unaffected since the identification stage would be complete regardless of whether the
digit was “clean” or “noisy.” In contrast, if identification and search are not discrete stages so that
visual noise is still part of the item being compared to the memory set items, one would expect
that the search time per item would increase. In fact, Sternberg obtained the former result—overall
times increased with a “noisy” probe digit but memory search times did not—and concluded that
identification of the digit was a stage prior to STM search. The basic logic of this experiment has
been used widely in cognitive psychology. It will serve us as a useful guide at several points in the
book (although we must note that it has not gone unchallenged; see Townsend, 1976)

The reality of information-processing models

If this is your first exposure to information processing, you may be asking yourself to what extent
the different structures presented in the model have been localized in the brain. The answer is that,
for the most part, they haven’t. Neurophysiologists working on brain functions have found chem-
ical changes in the brains of animals during learning stages that could correspond to STM func-
tions. In addition, studies of brain localization have revealed different functions of different parts of
the cortex (especially language functions). However, there is not likely to be an anatomical division
between STM and LTM. Nor have we localized the lexicon in the cortex, although recent brain-
imaging studies have identified areas of the brain that seem to be specialized for language processing
(Bornkessel-Schlesewsky & Friederici, 2007).
In fact, the concept of the mind is a rather abstract entity. We think of it as the executor respon-
sible for cognitive activity, which presumably can be ultimately explained in terms of the structure
and function of the brain. The task of the cognitive psychologist is to learn how the mind is struc-
tured and functions. If it were possible, perhaps an ideal way to study reading would be to open up
18 Background information

a reader’s brain and observe what kinds of activities and changes occurred during reading. But we
cannot do this. Furthermore, as we noted earlier, some brain-imaging techniques currently avail-
able are relatively slow with respect to moment-to-moment processes, and those that do provide
real-time information about brain processes often suggest that these processes occur too slowly to
actually be the basis of behavioral phenomena (Sereno & Rayner, 2003). Thus cognitive psycholo-
gists are forced to infer characteristics of how the mind works in skilled cognitive tasks like reading
on the basis of various types of evidence that we can accumulate. In a sense then, a cognitive
psychologist is like a detective searching for clues to how the mind works. The type of structures
presented in Figure 1.1 and elsewhere in this book serve as a convenient way of hypothesizing
about how the mind works and then summarizing what we know. Throughout this book we will
present evidence accumulated by cognitive psychologists about how the mind works in reading
and we will frequently use the convention of presenting information-processing flow diagrams
such as that presented in Figure 1.1 to summarize what we know. But it would be a mistake to
think of these structures as necessarily mapping directly onto parts of the brain.

Brain function and reading

In the previous section we differentiated between the brain and the mind. While much of our
focus will be on how the mind works in reading, we also know that there are specific brain func-
tions related to reading. In this section, we briefly review some of them.
Information registered on the retina is transmitted to the visual cortex. The cerebral cortex of
humans is divided into two hemispheres that have different, but complementary, functions. Some
functions are bilaterally represented in the brain. For example, there is a visual area at the back of
both of the hemispheres. However some areas, particularly associated with language processing,
seem to be localized almost exclusively in only one hemisphere. For most people, regions of the
left hemisphere are responsible for language processing. Regions of the right hemisphere, on the
other hand, are specialized for non-verbal, spatial processing. In some left-handed people the func-
tions of the two hemispheres of the brain may be reversed. The two hemispheres are connected by
a bundle of nerve fibers called the corpus callosum.
We know about the different functions of the two hemispheres from three types of evidence.
First, experiments on normal participants often take advantage of the fact that information seen in
the left half of the left visual field of either eye arrives initially in the right hemisphere, and things
seen in the right half of the visual field arrive initially in the left hemisphere. Material presented to
the center of vision is simultaneously available to both hemispheres of the brain. With respect to
the left and right ears the same pattern holds as for the presentation of information to the left or
right of fixation in the visual field; information presented to the right ear goes primarily to the left
hemisphere and information presented to the left ear goes primarily to the right hemisphere. From
experiments in which stimuli are briefly presented in the left or right visual field (or left or right
ear), we know that words are processed more efficiently when presented in the right visual field
(implying left hemisphere processing), whereas faces and pictures are processed more efficiently
when presented in the left visual field. From such experiments it is often argued that the left hemi-
sphere operates in a serial and analytic fashion, whereas the right hemisphere operates in a parallel
and holistic fashion, although there is no compelling reason for this conclusion.
The second way in which we know about the functions of the two hemispheres is from research
on brain-damaged patients who have one of the two hemispheres missing (from birth or due to
brain injury) or from “split-brain” patients whose corpus callosum has been severed as a treatment
for epilepsy. With respect to language the basic evidence is that, if certain regions of the left hemi-
sphere are damaged, in most people language functions are impaired, while right hemispheric
 Introduction 19

damage does not produce language impairment. For the “split-brain” patients the evidence is that
linguistic information that is put into the left hemisphere is processed normally, whereas there is
little comprehension of linguistic information put into the right hemisphere. Recently a great deal
about the reading process has been learned by examination of patients with brain damage (and
known lesion sites). In Chapter 11 we will review the evidence obtained from such patients.
Finally, experiments using brain-imaging techniques (such as PET, fMRI, and MEG) have
yielded evidence regarding areas of the brain involved in language processing. We will omit the
details of the physiology, such as the location of language-specific sites; the interested reader should
consult Frost et al., 2009; Pugh et al., 1996.

What is reading?
In this chapter so far we have presented preliminary information necessary to understand how
cognitive psychologists think about reading. This brings us to a critical question. What do we mean
by reading? It is obvious that, to many people, reading is an all-encompassing activity that can take
on different forms. For example, when you look at a map to tell you how to get from one place to
another, are you reading? When you proofread a paper for typographical mistakes, are you reading?
When you look at a computer program to find your programming error, are you reading? When
you scan a newspaper for the latest results of the stock market, are you reading? We will take a
conservative view here that none of these activities is what we have in mind as reading. It is also
obviously the case that when you read a novel on a 5-hour airplane trip you may at times be reading
slightly differently than when you read this book: 4 hours into your trip you find that you are only
half-way through the book so you start skipping over sections of the book that seem redundant,
looking only for relevant and new information so that you can finish it before reaching your desti-
nation. You would have a rather difficult time understanding a textbook if you read in such a
fashion, yet we can generally read most novels in that way and still end up understanding the story.
In our chapter on speed reading we will discuss skimming and the adjustments the reader makes
under such conditions. However, apart from that chapter, we will focus on the rather careful type
of skilled reading that occurs when you read to comprehend, as when you read a textbook or news-
paper article or a narrative in which you do not skim parts of the text. Our focus will also be largely
on silent reading. While it is clearly the case that beginning readers spend more time reading aloud
than silently, for the most part most people spend far more time reading silently than reading aloud.
It would be easy at this point to get into a lengthy argument about what is and is not reading.
We do not wish to do so. Hopefully, it is clear what we have in mind by reading. If forced to provide
a definition of reading, we would probably say something like: reading is the ability to extract visual
information from the page and comprehend the meaning of the text. By focusing on the careful reading of
a newspaper article, for example, we do not wish to imply that the other activities that we mentioned
are not interesting. Our bias is that activities such as proofreading and skimming probably involve
strategies and processes that are different from normal silent reading. Occasionally we will examine
such tasks. However, our central concern is how people read during normal silent reading.
This brings us to a second critical question. What is the best way to study reading? The answer
to the question is that it depends on which aspect of the reading process you are interested in
studying. We mentioned earlier that cognitive psychologists interested in word recognition gener-
ally present isolated words to people on a video monitor and ask them to make some kind of
judgment about or response to that word. We shall discuss such tasks in detail in Chapter 3. Other
researchers interested in the role of inner speech in reading have devised clever techniques to
determine its role in understanding written language. If researchers are interested in how much of
the text the reader comprehended, then they would want to examine how well readers can answer
20 Background information

questions about the content of the text. Techniques used to study inner speech and comprehen-
sion will be discussed in Chapters 7 through 9.
If the goal is to study the cognitive processes that occur during normal silent reading of text on
a moment-to-moment basis, then any technique that has readers do something different, such as
naming words in isolation or reading text out loud, may significantly distort the component process
in silent reading one wishes to study, such as word identification or the role of acoustic codes in
reading. While it is plausible that the components of reading do not change radically from task to
task, there is no guarantee of it. Thus the relevance of any technique is an open question if we do
not know how the processes work during silent reading of text.
This brings us to our favored technique for studying cognitive processes during actual silent
reading—eye movement recording. Recording of eye movements has a long history in experi-
mental psychology, as should be clear from an earlier section of this chapter. In the last 30 years eye
movement data have been widely used to infer moment-to-moment cognitive processes during
reading (Rayner, 1978a, 1998, 2009). It is now fairly clear that where readers look, and how long
they look there, provides valuable information about the mental processes associated with under-
standing a given word or set of words (Rayner, 1978a, 1998, 2009). Eye movement recording can
be accomplished in a variety of ways, but often involves shining a beam of invisible (infrared) light
onto the eye that is reflected back from the cornea or retina to a sensing device, or using an infrared
camera to form an image of the pupil whose location is determined by a computer. With this
methodology readers are free to look at any part of the text for as long as they wish. As mentioned
above, the technique also has a great deal of ecological validity in that participants in eye movement
experiments are actually engaged in the task we wish to study, namely reading.
This is not to say that eye movement recording is free from criticism. In order to unconfound
movements of the eyes from movements of the head, it has often been necessary to stabilize the head.
This is often done via the use of a bitebar (which consists of dental compound that is very soft when
a participant initially bites into it, but then quickly hardens to provide a dental impression that keeps
the head still). In other cases forehead and chin rests are used and participants generally read from a
display placed directly in front of them. Some critics have suggested that the rigid constraints on head
movement, plus the fact that in reading outside of the eye movement laboratory we often look down
at the text (rather than straight ahead), will lead to different reading strategies. It has even been suggested
that the mere fact that our eye movements are being recorded will make us conscious of them and lead
us to do something different when we read under such circumstances. Our impression is that these
concerns are all ill-founded. Indeed, Tinker (1939) demonstrated quite some time ago that the reading
rate of participants when asked to sit in a soft easy chair and read a book chapter did not differ from
the reading rate obtained in the eye movement laboratory. Furthermore, recent advances in eye move-
ment technology have made it possible to record eye movements without stabilizing the head in any
way (although generally greater precision is available when the head is stabilized).
All of the authors of this book have been participants in experiments using eye movement
recordings. Our firm impressions are that reading in the eye movement laboratory is virtually the
same as reading outside of it, and it is definitely our sense and intuition that this latter technique
provides a much better approximation of reading itself than any other technique. But we do not
want to argue that eye movement recording is the only way to study skilled reading. Many of the
techniques that will be mentioned throughout this book provide useful information and the best
type of evidence would be converging data in which information obtained from a number of the
techniques converge on the same answer to a given question. Our intention is to use converging
evidence from a number of sources to understand reading, but the data that will receive the greatest
emphasis from us will be those that are obtained while the participant is silently reading connected
text, rather than simply being engaged in one of the clever tasks cognitive psychologists have devised.
 Introduction 21

Models of reading
While there are many facts about reading that have been learned by cognitive psychologists (and
our emphasis in this book will be to rely on the facts that have been learned), many people find
cognitive psychology somewhat frustrating because there is often conflicting evidence on a single
issue. There are many reasons why this may be the case, including the fact that our experiments are
sometimes not very good. But another reason is that cognitive psychologists often have different
models or theories of how some mental process works. What are models and theories? Let’s
borrow from Carr (1982) in defining these two concepts. A theory is a set of principles (assump-
tions or rules or laws) that together constitute a verbal or mathematical description of an inter-
esting phenomenon, and an explanation of how or why the phenomenon happens. A theory
defines the important characteristics of a phenomenon that are then included in a model of the
phenomenon. A model represents a description of the major working parts of a real-life process
(such as reading). The description captures the most important characteristics of each part’s opera-
tion, although it might leave out large amounts of detail. Currently there are a number of models
of the reading process that (in our opinion) vary in the extent to which they capture important
aspects of the skill (Rayner & Reichle, 2010; Reichle, 2012).
We shall not attempt to describe the various models of reading here (see Chapter 14). Rather,
let us simply characterize them as being primarily (1) bottom-up, (2) top-down, or (3) interactive
models. Incidentally, these three types of models are characteristic not only of the reading process,
but also of descriptions of most of the tasks and phenomena that cognitive psychologists typically
investigate. Some books on reading (Just & Carpenter, 1987; Smith, 1971) begin by presenting their
audience with a model of reading and then interpreting relevant evidence within the framework
of that model. Other books (Crowder, 1982; Crowder & Wagner, 1992; Downing & Leong, 1982;
Gibson & Levin, 1975) manage to avoid presenting a model of reading altogether and present only
the facts as interpreted by the authors (in some cases the rationale is that a single model cannot
capture the complexities of reading or the varieties of types of reading). Still other books (Mitchell,
1982; Perfetti, 1985; Rayner & Pollatsek, 1989; Taylor & Taylor, 1983) present evidence first and
then, on the basis of the evidence, describe a model of the reading process. In general our strategy
will be to present you with the facts as we see them. Our bias is that there is a danger in presenting
the model first and then fitting the facts to the model because such a strategy often makes it sound
as if we know more than we really do. We also suspect that researchers often become committed
to a particular model of the reading process and then the model itself becomes more important
than the data that are collected. However, as will be clear in Chapter 6, we will rely very heavily
on a model of eye movement control in reading that we developed, and will use it as a convenient
way of presenting some critical issues to you.
We feel that most models are little more than general frameworks for understanding research on
reading that provide some biases on which aspects of reading are really important. Our discussion
of models below will indicate many of our biases and provide the “bare bones” of a general frame-
work. This framework will acquire more detail as we progress though the book. In the final chapter,
Chapter 14, we will briefly try to summarize the framework that has evolved throughout the book.
In bottom-up models (Gough, 1972), most information flows in a passive manner through the
human information-processing system. The major idea is that this flow of information is very fast
and that knowledge we have stored in memory has little impact on how the processing takes place.
In contrast, proponents of top-down models (Goodman, 1970; Smith, 1971) feel that the passive
flow of information through the processing system is relatively slow because there are numerous
bottlenecks (places where the architecture of the system forces us to slow down). Accordingly, to
short-circuit these bottlenecks these models stress that we rely heavily on information stored in
22 Background information

memory (general information that we have about the world) to help speed up our processing. The
primary way in which readers short-circuit the information-processing bottlenecks is to formulate
hypotheses about what they will next read. This view of reading, often referred to as the hypothesis
testing model of reading, was once very popular. However, a great deal of evidence now suggests that
the visual processing of text is actually very fast and the extent to which readers engage in hypoth-
esis testing or guessing behaviors seems to play a minimal role in the process of reading. We will
return to this issue at various points throughout the chapters that follow. For now, let us simply
point out that we believe a bottom-up view of reading more accurately characterizes much of the
available evidence. Having said this, we hasten to point out that we do not think top-down processes
play no role in reading. They clearly do. Perhaps our model of the reading process can best be
described as a bottom-up model in which the reader gets some help from top-down processes.
We have told you briefly what bottom-up and top-down models are, but we have not yet
mentioned interactive models. Interactive models (Just & Carpenter, 1980; McClelland, 1986;
Rumelhart, 1977) allow for all sorts of communications between top-down and bottom-up
processes. These types of models have become very popular in the last 30 years. Proponents of
these models claim that such models are very good in accounting for the data on reading processes.
Critics of these models argue that, while they may be able to account for lots of data, they are very
unconstrained and hence do not predict in advance very well what the outcome of any particular
experiment might be. In contrast, the major virtue of most bottom-up models is that they are very
good at making clear predictions about performance measures.
The view of reading that we will be presenting to you will largely be a bottom-up view, but
with some influences from top-down processes. Notice that we have used the word process a
number of times in this discussion. Elsewhere in this book we will make a distinction between the
process of reading and the product of reading. The product of reading is the information that gets
stored away in memory; it is what gets comprehended during reading. The major emphasis in this
book is on the process, rather than the product, of reading (although the latter will be discussed in
Chapters 8 and 9) because, from our point of view, the most important thing to understand about
reading is the process. This is a bias that not everyone would agree with. For example, educators
would undoubtedly argue that knowing the best way to teach children to read is more important
than understanding the process of skilled reading. While we appreciate their opinion, our sense is
that if we can understand the process of skilled reading, we may well be able to provide useful
information to educators about the end product of what they are trying to teach (Rayner, Foorman,
Perfetti, Pesetsky, & Seidenberg, 2001, 2002). In essence, we believe that understanding the end
product (skilled reading) should provide firm conclusions about how to instruct novices to become
skilled in the task. Hopefully our discussion in Chapters 10 and 11 will highlight some of the ways
that we believe research has made clear how children should be instructed to learn to read.
Some cognitive psychologists who study the product of reading would also want to argue with
us concerning our bias toward understanding the process of reading. To their way of thinking,
what people remember from what they read may be more important than how they go about the
process of reading. However, our response to such a point is that understanding the process by
which some mental structure is created almost logically entails understanding that structure. In
contrast, understanding what gets stored in memory may not reveal much about the processes that
created the structure. Thus understanding what is in memory as a result of reading discourse may
not be unique to reading—essentially the same structures may be created when people listen to
discourse. We are not saying that understanding the product of reading and how that product gets
remembered is not important. It’s just that reading is a remarkable skill that must be understood
quite apart from issues like general comprehension skills and intelligence.
References
Aaron, P. G. , Joshi, M. , & Williams, K. A. (1999). Not all reading disabilities are alike. Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 32(2), 120–137.
Aarons, L. (1971). Subvocalization: Aural and EMG feedback in reading. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 33,
271–306.
Abney, S. (1989). A computational model of human parsing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18,
129–144.
Abramson, M. , & Goldinger, S. D. (1997). What the reader’s eye tells the mind’s ear: Silent reading activates
inner speech. Perception & Psychophysics, 59(7), 1059–1068.
Acha, J. , & Perea, M. (2008). The effect of neighborhood frequency in reading: Evidence with transposed-letter
neighbors. Cognition, 108, 290–300.
Acheson, D. J. , & MacDonald, M. C. (2009). Twisting tongues and memories: Explorations of the relationship
between language production and verbal working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 60 , 329–350.
Ackerman, P. T. , & Dykman, R. A. (1993). Phonological processes, confrontational naming, and immediate
memory in dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26(9), 597–609.
Adams, M. J. (1979). Models of word recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 11, 133–176.
Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Adams, M. J. (1998). The three-cueing system. In J. Osborn & F. Lehr (Eds.), Literacy for all: Issues in teaching
and learning (pp. 73–99). New York: Guilford Press.
Adams, M. J. , Treiman, R. , & Pressley, M. (1998). Reading, writing, and literacy. In I. E. Sigel (Series Ed.) &
K. A. Renninger (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology volume 4: Child psychology in practice (pp.
275–355). New York : Wiley.
Adlard, A. , & Hazan, V. (1998). Speech perception in children with specific reading difficulties (dyslexia).
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology, 51A(1), 153–177.
Alba, J. W. , & Hasher, L. (1983). Is memory schematic? Psychological Bulletin, 93, 203–231.
Albert, M. (1975). Cerebral dominance and reading habits. Nature, 256, 403–404.
Albrecht, J. E. , & Clifton, C. Jr. (1998). Accessing singular antecedents in conjoined phrases. Memory &
Cognition, 26(3), 599–610.
Albrecht, J. E. , & Myers, J. L. (1995). Role of context in accessing distant information during reading. Journal
of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1459–1468.
Albrecht, J. E. , & O'Brien, E. J. (1993). Updating a mental model: Maintaining both local and global coherence.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1061–1070.
Alegria, J. , Pignot, E. , & Morais, J. (1982). Phonetic analysis of speech and memory codes in beginning
readers. Memory & Cognition, 10, 451–456.
Alexander, J. , & Nygaard, L. C. (2008). Reading voices and hearing text: Talker-specific auditory imagery in
reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 446–459.
Allen, T. (1986). A study of the achievement patterns of hearing-impaired students: 1974–1983. In A. N.
Schildroth & M. A. Karchmer (Eds.), Deaf children in America (pp. 161–206). San Diego, CA: College-Hill.
Alleton, V. (1970). L’ecriture Chinoise. Que sais-je?, 1374. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Allport, D. A. (1977). On knowing the meaning of words we are unable to report: The effects of visual masking.
In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance VI. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Almor, A. (1999). Noun-phrase anaphora and focus: The informational load hypothesis. Psychological Review,
106 , 748–765.
Altarriba, J. , Kambe, G. , Pollatsek, A. , & Rayner, K. (2001). Semantic codes are not used in integrating
information across eye fixations in reading: Evidence from fluent Spanish–English bilinguals. Perception &
Psychophysics, 63, 875–890.
Altmann, G. T. M. , van Nice, K. Y. , Garnham, A. , & Henstra, J-A. (1998). Late closure in context. Journal of
Memory and Language, 38, 459–484.
American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Children with Disabilities .(1999). The pediatrician’s role in
development and implementation of an individual education plan (IEP) and/or an individual family service plan
(IFSP). Pediatrics, 104, 124–127.
American Academy of Pediatrics, Section on Ophthalmology, Council on Children with Disabilities, American
Academy of Ophthalmology, American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus and American
Association of Certified Orthoptists .(2009). Learning disabilities, dyslexia, and vision. Pediatrics, 124, 837–844.
Amitay, S. , Ben-Yehudah, G. , Banai, K. , & Ahissar, M. (2002). Disabled readers suffer from visual and
auditory impairments but not from a specific magnocellular deficit. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 125(10),
2272–2284.
Anderson, J. R. (1976). Language, memory, and thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Anderson, J. R. (2010). Cognitive psychology and its implications: Seventh edition. New York: Worth
Publishing.
Anderson, R. C. , Hiebert, E. H. , Wilkinson, I. A. G. , & Scott, J. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers.
Champaign, IL: National Academy of Education and Center for the Study of Reading.
Anderson, R. C. , & Pichert, J. W. (1978). Recall of previously unrecallable information following a shift in
perspective. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 1–12.
Andrews, S. (1989). Frequency and neighborhood effects on lexical access: Activation or search? Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 802–814.
Andrews, S. (1992). Frequency and neighborhood effects on lexical access: Lexical similarity or orthographic
redundancy? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 234–254.
Andrews, S. (1996). Lexical retrieval and selection processes: Effects of transposed-letter confusability. Journal
of Memory and Language, 35, 775–800.
Andrews, S. (1997). The effects of orthographic similarity on lexical retrieval: Resolving neighborhood conflicts.
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 439–461.
Andrews, S. , Miller, B. , & Rayner, K. (2004). Eye movements and morphological segmentation of compound
words: There is a mouse in mousetrap. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16, 285–311.
Andriessen, J. J. , & de Voogd, A. H. (1973). Analysis of eye movement patterns in silent reading. IPO Annual
Progress Report, 8, 29–35.
Angele, B. , & Rayner, K. (2011). Parafoveal processing of word n+2 during reading: Do the preceding words
matter? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 1210–1220.
Angele, B. , Slattery, T. J. , Yang, J. , Kliegl, R. , & Rayner, K. (2008). Parafoveal processing in reading:
Manipulating n+1 and n+2 previews simultaneously. Visual Cognition, 16, 697–707.
Antes, J. R. (1974). The time course of picture viewing. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 103, 62–70.
Anthony, J. L. , Lonigan, C. J. , Burgess, S. R. , Driscoll, K. , Phillips, B. M. , & Cantor, B. G. (2002). Structure
of preschool phonological sensitivity: Overlapping sensitivity to rhyme, words, syllables, and phonemes. Journal
of Experimental Child Psychology, 82, 65–92.
Aro, M. , & Wimmer, H. (2003). Learning to read: English in comparison to six more regular orthographies.
Applied Psycholinguistics, 24(4), 621–635.
Aronoff, M. , & Koch, E. (1996). Context-sensitive regularities in English vowel spelling. Reading and Writing:
An Interdisciplinary Journal, 8(3), 251–265.
Arregui, A. , Clifton, C. Jr. , Frazier, L. , & Moulton, K. (2006). Processing elided verb phrases with flawed
antecedents: The recycling hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 232–246.
Ashby, J. (2010). Phonology is fundamental in skilled reading: Evidence from ERPs. Psychonomic Bulletin &
Review, 17, 95–100.
Ashby, J. , & Clifton, C. Jr. (2005). The prosodic property of lexical stress affects eye movements during silent
reading. Cognition, 96, B89–B100.
Ashby, J. , & Martin, A. E. (2008). Prosodic phonological representations early in visual word recognition.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 224–236.
Ashby, J. , & Rayner, K. (2004). Representing syllable information in word recognition during silent reading:
Evidence from eye movements. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 391–426.
Ashby, J. , & Rayner, K. (2012). Learning to read in an alphabetic writing system: Evidence from cognitive
neuroscience. In M. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive Neuroscience: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Ashby, J. , Rayner, K. , & Clifton, C. Jr. (2005). Eye movements of highly skilled and average readers:
Differential effects of frequency and predictability. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A,
1065–1086.
Ashby J. , Sanders L. D. , & Kingston J. (2009). Skilled readers begin processing phonological features by 80
msec: Evidence from ERPs. Biological Psychology, 80, 84–94.
Ashby, J. , Treiman, R. , Kessler, B. , & Rayner, K. (2006). Vowel processing during silent reading: Evidence
from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 416–424.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ayres, T. J. (1984). Silent reading time for tongue-twister paragraphs. American Journal of Psychology, 97,
605–609.
Baayen, R. H. , Piepenbrock, R. & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX Lexical Database [CD–ROM]. Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania, Linguistic Data Consortium.
Backman, J. E. (1983). Psycholinguistic skills and reading acquisition: A look at early readers. Reading
Research Quarterly, 18, 466–479.
Backman, J. , Bruck, M. , Hebert, M. , & Seidenberg, M. S. (1984). Acquisition and use of spelling–sound
correspondences in reading. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 38, 114–133.
Baddeley, A. D. (1979) Working memory and reading. In P. A. Kolers , M. E. Wrolstad , & H. Bouma (Eds.),
Processing of visible language. New York: Plenum.
Baddeley, A. D. , Eldridge, M. , & Lewis, V. (1981). The role of subvocalization in reading. Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 33A, 439–454.
Baddeley, A. , & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. In G. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and
motivation (Vol. 8). New York: Academic Press.
Baddeley, A. , & Lewis, V. (1981). Inner active processes in reading: The inner voice, the inner ear, and the
inner eye. In A. M. Lesgold & C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Interactive processes in reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Baddeley, A. , Logie, R. , Nimmo-Smith, I. , & Brereton, N. (1985). Components of fluent reading. Journal of
Memory and Language, 24, 119–131.
Bader, M. (1998). Prosodic influences on reading syntactically ambiguous sentences. In J. Fodor & F. Ferreira
(Eds.), Reanalysis in sentence processing (pp. 1–46). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Badian, N. A. (1998). A validation of the role of preschool phonological and orthographic skills in the prediction
of reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(5), 472–481.
Baker, L. , & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P. D. Pearson , R. Barr , M. L. Kamil , &
P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research. New York: Longman.
Ball, E. W. , & Blachman, B. A. (1988). Phoneme segmentation training: Effect on reading readiness. Annals of
Dyslexia, 38, 208–225.
Balmuth, M. (1982). The roots of phonics: A historical introduction. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Balota, D. A. (1983). Automatic semantic activation and episodic memory encoding. Journal of Verbal Learning
and Verbal Behavior, 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 neglected 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 reading. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 364–390.
Balota, D. A. , & Rayner, K. (1983). Parafoveal visual information and semantic contextual constraints. Journal
of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 726–738.
Balota, D. A. , Yap, M. J. , Cortese, M. J. , Hutchison, K. A. , Kessler, B. , Loftis, B. , et al. (2007). The English
lexicon project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445–459.
Banks, W. P. , Oka, E. , & Shugarman, S. (1981). Recoding of printed words to internalize speech: Does
recoding come before lexical access? In O. J. L. Tzeng & H. Singer , (Eds.), Perception of print. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Baron, J. (1973). Phonemic stage not necessary for reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 25,
241–246.
Baron, J. (1979). Orthographic and word specific mechanisms in children’s reading of words. Child
Development, 50 , 60–72.
Baron, J. , & Strawson, C. (1976). Use of orthographic and word-specific knowledge in reading words aloud.
Journal of Experimental 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.
Baron, J. , & Treiman, R. (1980). Use of orthography in reading and learning to read. In J. F. Kavanagh & R.L.
Venezky (Eds.), Orthography, reading, and dyslexia. Baltimore: University Park Press.
Baron, J. , Treiman, R. , Freyd, J. , & Kellman, P. (1980). Spelling and reading by rules. In U. Frith (Ed.),
Cognitive processes in spelling. London: Academic Press.
Barr, R. (1974). The effect of instruction on pupil’s reading strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 10,
555–582.
Barron, R. W. (1981a). The development of visual word recognition: A review. In G. E. MacKinnon & T. G.
Waller (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice (Vol. 3). New York: Academic Press.
Barron, R. W. (1981b). Reading skill and reading strategies. In A. M. Lesgold & C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Interactive
processes in reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Barron, R. W. (1986). Word recognition in early reading: A review of the direct and indirect access hypothesis.
Cognition, 24, 93–119.
Barron, R. W. , & Baron, J. (1977). How children get meaning from printed words. Child Development, 48,
587–594.
Bartlett, F. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Barton, S. B. , & Sanford, A. J. (1993). A case study of anomaly detection: Shallow semantic processing and
cohesion establishment. Memory & Cognition, 21, 477–487.
Bauer, D. , & Stanovich, K. E. (1980). Lexical access and the spelling-to-sound regularity effect. Memory &
Cognition, 8, 424–432.
Beaton, A. A. (2004). Dyslexia, reading and the brain: A sourcebook of psychological and biological research.
Florence, KY: Taylor & Francis/Routledge.
Beauvois, M. F. , & Derouesne, J. (1979). Phonological alexia: Three dissociations. Journal of Neurology,
Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 42, 1115–1124.
Beck, I. L. (1981). Reading problems and instructional practices. In G. E. MacKinnon & T. G. Waller (Eds.),
Reading research: Advances in theory and practice. New York: Academic Press.
Beck, I. L. (1998). Understanding beginning reading: A journey through teaching and research. In J. Osborn &
F. Lehr (Eds.), Literacy for all: Issues in teaching and learning (pp. 11–31). New York: Guilford Press.
Beck, I. L. (2006). Making sense of phonics. New York: Guilford Press.
Beck, I. L. , Perfetti, C. A. , & McKeown, M. G. (1982). Effects of long-term vocabulary instruction on lexical
access and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 506–521.
Becker, C. A. (1985). What do we really know about semantic context effects during reading? In D. Besner , T.
G., Waller , & G. E. MacKinnon , (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice (Vol. 5). New York:
Academic Press.
Becker, W. , & Jürgens, R. (1979). An analysis of the saccadic system by means of double-step stimuli. Vision
Research, 19, 967–983.
Becker, M. W. , Pashler, H. , & Lubin, J. (2007). Object-intrinsic oddities draw early saccades. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 20–30.
Beech, J. R. , & Harris, M. (1997). The prelingually deaf young reader: A case of reliance on direct lexical
access? Journal of Research in Reading, 20, 105–121.
Beggs, W. D. A. , & Howarth, P. N. (1985). Inner speech as a learned skill. Journal of Experimental Child
Psychology, 39, 396–411.
Bélanger, N. N. , Mayberry, R. I. , & Baum, S. R. (2012 in press). Reading difficulties in adult deaf readers of
French: Phonological codes, not guilty! Scientific Studies of Reading.
Bender, L. (1955). Twenty years of clinical research on schizophrenic children. In G. Caplan (Ed.), Emotional
problems of early childhood. New York: Basic Books.
Bentin, S. , Bargai, N. , & Katz, L. (1984). Orthographic and phonemic coding for lexical access: Evidence from
Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 353–368.
Bentin, S. , & Leshem, H. (1993). On the interaction between phonological awareness and reading acquisition:
It’s a two-way street. Annals of Dyslexia, 43, 125–148.
Berninger, V. W. , Abbott, R. D. , Thomson, J. , Wagner, R. , Swanson, H. L. , Wijsman, E. M. , et al. (2006).
Modeling phonological core deficits within a working memory architecture in children and adults with
developmental dyslexia. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(2), 165–198.
Bertelson, P. , Morais, J. , Alegria, J. , & Content, A. (1985a). Phonetic analysis capacity and learning to read.
Nature, 313, 73–74.
Bertelson, P. , Mousty, P. , & D'Alimonte, G. (1985b). A study of Braille reading: Patterns of hand activity in
one-handed and two-handed reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37A, 235–256.
Bertram, R. , & Hyönä, J. (2003). The length of a complex word modifies the role of morphological structure:
Evidence from eye movements when reading short and long Finnish compounds. Journal of Memory and
Language, 48, 615–634.
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. , & Davelaar, E. (1982). Basic processes in reading: Two phonological codes. Canadian Journal of
Psychology, 36, 701–711.
Besner, D. , Davies, J. , & Daniels, S. (1981). Reading for meaning: The effects of concurrent articulation.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 415–437.
Besner, D. , & Hildebrandt, N. (1987). Orthographic and phonological codes in the oral reading of Japanese
Kana. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 335–343.
Besner, D. , Risko, E. , & Sklair, N. (2005). Spatial attention as a necessary preliminary to early processes in
reading. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 99–108.
Bestgen, Y. , & Vonk, W. (2000). Temporal adverbials as segmentation markers in discourse comprehension.
Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 74–87.
Bever, T. G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structure. In J. R. Hayes (Eds.), Cognitive development of
language. New York : Wiley.
Beverly, S. E. , & Perfetti, C. A. (1983). Skill differences in phonological representation and development of
orthographic knowledge. Paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society of Research in Child
Development, Detroit, MI.
Biemiller, A. (1970). The development of the use of graphic and contextual information as children learn to
read. Reading Research Quarterly, 6, 75–96.
Binder, K. , Duffy, S. , & Rayner, K. (2001). The effects of thematic fit and discourse context on syntactic
ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 297–324.
Binder, K. S. , Pollatsek, A. , & Rayner, K. (1999). Extraction of information to the left of the fixated word in
reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1162–1172.
Binder, K. S. , & Rayner, K. (1998). Contextual strength does not modulate the subordinate bias effect:
Evidence from eye fixations and self-paced reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 271–276.
Birch, S. , Albrecht, J. E. , & Myers, J. L. (2000). Syntactic focusing strategies influence discourse processing.
Discourse Processes, 30, 285–304.
Birch, S. , & Clifton, C. Jr. (1995). Focus, accent, and argument structure. Language and Speech, 33, 365–391.
Birch, S. , & Rayner, K. (1997). Linguistic focus affects eye movements during reading. Memory & Cognition, 25
, 653–660.
Birch, S. , & Rayner, K. (2010). Effects of syntactic prominence on eye movements during reading. Memory &
Cognition, 38, 740–752.
Bishop, C. H. (1964). Transfer effects of word and letter training in reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and
Verbal Behavior, 36, 840–847.
Bishop, D. V. , & Adams, C. (1990). A prospective study of the relationship between specific language
impairment, phonological disorders and reading retardation. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 31,
1027–1050.
Blachman, B. A. (1984). Relationship of rapid naming ability and language analysis skills to kindergarten and
first-grade reading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 610–622.
Blachman, B. A. (2000). Phonological awareness. In M. L. Kamil , P. B. Mosenthal , P. D. Pearson , & R. Barr
(Eds.), Handbook of reading research, Vol. III (pp. 483–502). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Black, J. L. , Collins, D. W. K. , DeRoach, J. N. , & Zubrick, S. (1984). A detailed study of sequential saccadic
eye movements for normal and poor reading children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 59, 423–434.
Blanchard, H. E. (1985). A comparison of some processing time measures based on eye movements. Acta
Psychologica, 58, 1–15.
Blanchard, H. E. , Pollatsek, A. , & Rayner, K. (1989). The acquisition of parafoveal word information in reading.
Perception & Psychophysics, 46, 85–94.
Blomert, L. , & Mitterer, H. (2004). The fragile nature of the speech-perception deficit in dyslexia: Natural vs.
synthetic speech. Brain and Language, 89(1), 21–26.
Blythe, H. I. , Liversedge, S. P. , Joseph, H. S. S. L. , White, S. J. , & Rayner, K. (2009).Visual information
capture during fixations in reading for children and adults. Vision Research, 49(12), 1583–1591.
Boada, R. , & Pennington, B. F. (2006). Deficient implicit phonological representations in children with dyslexia.
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 95(3), 153–193.
Bock, J. K. , & Brewer, W. F. (1985). Discourse structure and mental models. In T. C. Carr (Ed.), The
development of readings skills. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bock, K. , & Mazella, J. R. (1983). Intonational marking of given and new information: Some consequences for
comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 11, 64–76.
Boder, E. (1973). Developmental dyslexia: A diagnostic based on three atypical reading–spelling patterns.
Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 15, 663–687.
Boland, J. (2004). Linking eye movements to sentence comprehension in reading and listening. In M. Carreiras
Jr & C. C. . (Eds.), The on-line study of sentence comprehension (pp. 51–76). New York: Psychology Press.
Boland, J. , & Blodgett, A. (2006). Argument status and PP attachment. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research,
35, 385–403.
Bond, G. L. , & Dykstra, R. (1967). The cooperative research program in first-grade reading instruction.
Reading Research Quarterly, 2(4), 5–142.
Bond, G. L. , & Dykstra, R. (1997). The cooperative research program in first-grade reading instruction.
Reading Research Quarterly, 32(4), 345–427.
Bonifacci, P. , & Snowling, M. J. (2008). Speed of processing and reading disability: A cross-linguistic
investigation of dyslexia and borderline intellectual functioning. Cognition, 107(3), 999–1017.
Bornkessel, I. , & Schlesewsky, M. (2006). The extended argument dependency model: A neurocognitive
approach to sentence comprehension across languages. Psychological Review, 113, 787–821.
Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. , & Friederici, A. D. (2007). Neuroimaging studies of sentence and discourse
perception. In G. Gaskell (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 407–424). Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Bos, C. , Mather, N. , Dickson, S. , Podhajski, B. , & Chard, D. (2001). Perceptions and knowledge of
preservice and inservice educators about early reading instruction. Annals of Dyslexia, 51, 97–120.
Bouma, H. , & de Voogd, A. H. (1974). On the control of eye saccades in reading. Vision Research, 14,
273–284.
Bower, G. H. , Black, J. B. , & Turner, T. J. (1979). Scripts in memory for text. Cognitive Psychology, 11,
177–220.
Bower, G. H. , & Morrow, D. G. (1990). Mental models in narrative comprehension. Science, 247, 44–48.
Bower, T. G. R. (1970) Reading by eye. In H. Levin & J. P. Williams (Eds.), Basic studies on reading. New
York: Basic Books.
Bowman, M. , & Treiman, R. (2002). Relating print and speech: The effects of letter names and word position
on reading and spelling performance. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 82, 305–340.
Bradley, D. (1979). Lexical representations of derivational relations. In M. Aranoff & M. Kean (Eds.), Juncture.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bradley, L. , & Bryant, P. E. (1978). Difficulties in auditory organization as a possible cause of reading
backwardness. Nature, 271, 746–747.
Bradley, L. , & Bryant, P. E. (1983). Categorizing sounds and learning to read—A causal connection. Nature,
301 , 419–421.
Bradshaw, J. L. (1974). Peripherally presented and unreported words may bias the meaning of a centrally
fixated homograph. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 103, 1200–1202.
Brady, S. , Shankweiler, D. , & Mann, V. A. (1983). Speech perception and memory coding in relation to
reading ability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 35(2), 345–367.
Brady, S. A. (1997). Ability to encode phonological representations: An underlying difficulty of poor readers. In
B. A. Blachman (Ed.), Foundations of reading acquisition and dyslexia: Implications for early intervention (pp.
21–47). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Bransford, J. D. , & Johnson, M. K. (1972). Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of
comprehension and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 717–726.
Breen, M. , & Clifton, C. Jr. (2011). Stress matters: Effects of anticipated lexical stress on silent reading. Journal
of Memory and Language, 64, 153–170.
Breier, J. I. , Fletcher, J. M. , Denton, C. , & Gray, L. C. (2004). Categorical perception of speech stimuli in
children at risk for reading difficulty. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 88(2), 152–170.
Breznitz, Z. , & Meyler, A. (2003). Speed of lower-level auditory and visual processing as a basic factor in
dyslexia: Electrophysiological evidence. Brain and Language, 85(2), 166–184.
Briggs, C. , & Elkind, D. (1973). Cognitive development in early readers. Developmental Psychology, 9,
279–280.
Brim, B. J. (1968). Impact of a reading improvement program. Journal of Educational Research, 62, 177–182.
Britt, M. A. (1994). The interaction of referential ambiguity and argument structure in the parsing of prepositional
phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 251–283.
Broadbent, D. E. (1958). Perception and communication. London: Pergamon.
Broadbent, D. E. (1984). The Maltese cross: A new simplistic model for memory. Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, 7 , 55–94.
Broadbent, W. H. (1872). On the cerebral mechanism of speech and thought. Proceedings of the Royal Medical
and Chirurgical Society of London (pp. 25–29). London: Anonymous .
Brooks, L. (1977). Visual pattern in fluent word identification. In A. S. Reber & D. L. Scarborough (Eds.),
Toward a psychology of reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Brown, A. L. (1980). Metacognitive development and reading. In R. J. Spiro , B. C. Bruce , & W. F. Brewer ,
(Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Brown, B. , Haegerstrom-Portnoy, G. , Adams, A. J. , Yingling, C. D. , Galin, D. , Herron, J. , et al. (1983).
Predictive eye movements do not discriminate between dyslexic and normal children. Neuropsychologia, 21,
121–128.
Brown, R. (1970). Psychology and reading. In H. Levin & J. P. Williams (Eds.), Basic studies on reading. New
York : Basic Books.
Brown, R. W. (1958). Words and things. New York: Free Press.
Bruce, D. J. (1964). The analysis of word sounds by young children. British Journal of Educational Psychology,
34, 158–170.
Bruck, M. (1990). Word-recognition skills of adults with childhood diagnoses of dyslexia. Developmental
Psychology, 26(3), 439–454.
Bruck, M. (1992). Persistence of dyslexics’ phonological awareness deficits. Developmental Psychology, 28(5),
874–886.
Bruck, M. , Genesee, F. , & Caravolas, M. (1997). A cross-linguistic study of early literacy acquisition. In B. A.
Blachman (Ed.), Foundations of reading acquisition and dyslexia: Implications for early intervention (pp.
145–162). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Bruno, J. L. , Manis, F. R. , Keating, P. , Sperling, A. J. , Nakamoto, J. , & Seidenberg, M. S. (2007). Auditory
word identification in dyslexic and normally achieving readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 97(3),
183–204.
Brunswick, N. , McCrory, E. , Price, C. J. , Frith, C. D. , & Frith, U. (1999). Explicit and implicit processing of
words and pseudowords by adult developmental dyslexics. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 122(10), 1901–1917.
Bryant, P. E. , & Impey, L. (1986). The similarities between normal readers and developmental and acquired
dyslexics. Cognition, 24, 121–137.
Brysbaert, M. , Drieghe, D. , & Vitu, F. (2003). Word skipping: Implications for eye movement control in reading.
In G. Underwood (Ed.), Cognitive processes in eye guidance. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Brysbaert, M. , & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kucera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word
frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English.
Behavior Research Methods, 41, 488–496.
Brysbaert, M. , & Vitu, F. (1998). Word skipping: Implications for theories of eye movement control in reading. In
Underwood, G. (Ed.), Eye guidance in reading and scene perception (pp. 125–147). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Burd, L. , & Kerbeshian, J. (1988). Familial pervasive development disorder, Tourette disorder, and hyperlexia.
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 12, 233–234.
Burden, V. , & Campbell, R. (1994). The development of word-coding skills in the born deaf: An experimental
study of deaf school-leavers. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 12, 331–349.
Bus, A. G. , van Ijzendoorn, M. H. , & Pellegrini, A. D. (1995). Joint book reading makes for success in learning
to read: A meta-analysis on intergenerational transmission of literacy. Review of Educational Research, 65(1),
1–21.
Buswell, G. T. (1922). Fundamental reading habits: A study of their development. Chicago: Chicago University
Press.
Byrne, B. (1992). Studies in the acquisition procedure for reading: Rationale, hypotheses, and data. In P. B.
Gough , L. C. Ehri , & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 1–34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Inc.
Byrne, B. , & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1991). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young
children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 451–455.
Byrne, B. , & Shea, P. (1979). Semantic and phonetic memory codes in beginning readers. Memory &
Cognition, 7 , 333–338.
Cain, K. , & Oakhill, J. V. (1999). Inference making ability and its relation to comprehension failure in young
children. Reading and Writing, 11(5–6), 489–503.
Cain, K. , Oakhill, J. V. , Barnes, M. A. , & Bryant, P. E. (2001). Comprehension skill, inference-making ability,
and the relation to knowledge. Memory & Cognition, 29(6), 850–859.
Cain, K. , Oakhill, J. V. , & Elbro, C. (2003). The ability to learn new word meanings from context by schoolage
children with and without language comprehension difficulties. Journal of Child Language, 30, 681–694.
Calef, T. , Pieper, M. , & Coffey, B. (1999). Comparisons of eye movements before and after a speed-reading
course. Journal of the American Optometric Association, 70, 171–181.
Calfee, R. C. , Chapman, R. , & Venezky, R. (1972). How a child needs to think to learn to read. In L. W. Gregg
(Ed.), Cognition in learning and memory. New York: Wiley.
Calfee, R. C. , Lindamood, P. , & Lindamood, C. (1973). Acoustic–phonetic skills and reading: Kindergarten
through twelfth grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 293–298.
Campbell, F. W. , & Wurtz, R. H. (1978). Saccadic omission: Why we do not see a grey-out during a saccadic
eye movement. Vision Research, 18, 1297–1303.
Caramazza, A. , Grober, E. H. , Garvey, C. , & Yates, J. (1977). Comprehension of anaphoric pronouns.
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 601–609.
Cardoso-Martins, C. (2001). The reading abilities of beginning readers of Brazilian Portugese: Implications for a
theory of reading acquisition. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(4), 289–317.
Carillo, L. W. , & Sheldon, W. D. (1952). The flexibility of the reading rate. Journal of Educational Psychology,
43 , 299–305.
Carlson, G. N. , & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1988). Thematic roles and language comprehension. In W. Wilkins (Ed.),
Syntax and semantics: Thematic relations (pp. 263–300). New York: Academic Press.
Carlson, K. (2009). How prosody influences sentence comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3,
July.
Carr, T. H. (1981). Building theories of reading ability: On the relation between individual differences in
cognitive skills and reading comprehension. Cognition, 9, 73–114.
Carr, T. H. (1982). What’s in a model: Reading theory and reading instruction. In M. H. Singer (Ed.), Competent
reader, disabled reader: Research and application. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Carr, T. H. , Davidson, B. J. , & Hawkins, H. L. (1978). Perceptual flexibility in word recognition: Strategies
affect orthographic computation but not lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception
and Performance, 4, 674–690.
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 Perception 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). Orlando, FL:
Academic Press.
Carreiras, M. , Duñabeitia, J. A. , & Molinaro, N. (2009). Consonants and vowels contribute differently to visual
word recognition: ERPs of relative position priming. Cerebral Cortex, 19, 2659–2670.
Carreiras, M. , Perea, M. , & Grainger, J. (1997). Effects of orthographic neighborhood in visual word
recognition: Cross-task comparisons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,
23, 857–871.
Carroll, J. M. , Snowling, M. J. , Stevenson, J. , & Hulme, C. (2003). The development of phonological
awareness in preschool children. Developmental Psychology, 39, 913–923.
Carroll, P. , & Slowiaczek, M. L. (1987). Modes and modules: Multiple pathways to the language processor. In
J. Garfield (Ed.), Modularity in knowledge representation and natural language processing. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
Carver, R. P. (1971). Sense and nonsense in speed reading. Silver Spring, MD: Revrac.
Carver, R. P. (1972). Speed readers don’t read; they skim. Psychology Today, 22–30.
Carver, R. P. (1985). How good are some of the world’s best readers? Reading Research Quarterly, 4,
389–419.
Carver, R. P. (1997). Reading for one second, one minute, or one year from the perspective of rauding theory.
Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 3–43.
Castiglioni-Spalten, M. L. , & Ehri, L. C. (2003). Phonemic awareness instruction: Contribution of articulatory
segmentation to novice beginners’ reading and spelling. Scientific Studies of Reading, 7(1), 25–52.
Castles, A. , & Coltheart, M. (1993).Varieties of developmental dyslexia. Cognition, 47(2), 149–180.
Castles, A. , Datta, H. , Gayan, J. , & Olson, R. K. (1999).Varieties of developmental reading disorder: Genetic
and environmental influences. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72(2), 73–94.
Cattell, J. M. (1886). The time it takes to see and name objects. Mind, 11, 63–65.
Catts, H. W. , Fey, M. E. , Zhang, X. , & Tomblin, J. B. (1999). Language basis of reading and reading
disabilities: Evidence from a longitudinal investigation. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3(4), 331–361.
Chace, K. H. , Rayner, K. , & Well, A. D. (2005). Eye movements and phonological preview benefit: Effects of
reading skill. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 209–217.
Chall, J. S. (1958). Readability: An appraisal of research and application. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University.
Chall, J. S. (1967/1996). Learning to read: The great debate ( 3rd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
Chall, J. S. (1983/1996). Stages of reading development. Orlando, FL: Harcourt–Brace.
Chamberlain, C. (2002). Reading skills of deaf adults who sign: Good and poor readers compared. Unpublished
Ph.D., McGill University, Montreal.
Chambers, S. M. (1979). Letter and order information in lexical access. Journal of Verbal Learning and
Behavior, 18 , 225–241.
Chaney, C. (1992). Language development, metalinguistic skills, and print awareness in 3-year-old children.
Applied Psycholinguistics, 13(4), 485–514.
Chase, W. G. , & Clark, H. H. (1972). Mental operations in the comparison of sentences and pictures. In L. W.
Gregg (Ed.), Cognition in learning and memory. New York: Wiley.
Cheesman, J. , & Merikle, P. M. (1984). Priming with and without awareness. Perception & Psychophysics, 36,
387–395.
Chen, H-C. , & Tang, C-K. , (1998). The effective visual field in Chinese. Reading and Writing, 10, 245–254.
Cheung, H. , & Ng, L. K. H. (2003). Chinese reading development in some major Chinese societies: An
introduction. In C. McBride-Chang & H-C. Chen (Eds.), Reading development in Chinese children (pp. 3–17).
Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Chiappe, P. , Stringer, R. , Siegel, L. S. , & Stanovich, K. E. (2002). Why the timing deficit hypothesis does not
explain reading disability in adults. Reading and Writing, 15(1–2), 73–107.
Chmiel, N. (1984). Phonological recoding for reading: The effect of concurrent articulation in a Stroop task.
British Journal of Psychology, 75, 213–220.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton.
Chomsky, N. (1959). A review of Verbal Behavior by B. F. Skinner. Language, 35, 26–58.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, N. (1970). Phonology and reading. In H. Levin & J. P. Williams (Eds.), Basic studies on reading. New
York : Basic Books.
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding: The Pisa lectures. Dordrecht: Foris.
Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, N. , & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.
Christianson, K. , Hollingworth, A. , Halliwell, J. , & Ferreira, F. (2001). Thematic roles assigned along the
garden path linger. Cognitive Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42, 368–407.
Christianson, K. , Johnson, R. L. , & Rayner, K. (2005). Letter transpositions within and across morphemes.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1327–1339.
Chumbley, J. I. , & Balota, D. A. (1984). A word’s meaning affects the decision in lexical decision. Memory &
Cognition, 12, 590–606.
Ciuffreda, K. J. , Kenyon, R. W. , & Stark, L. (1983). Saccadic intrusions contributing to reading disability: A
case report. American Journal of Optometry and Physiological Optics, 60, 242–249.
Clark, H. H. , & Haviland, S. E. (1977). Comprehension and the given–new contract. In R. O. Freedle (Ed.),
Discourse production and comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ables.
Clark, H. H. , & Sengul, C. J. (1979). In search of referents for nouns and pronouns. Memory & Cognition, 7,
35–41.
Clay, M. M. (1979) Reading: The patterning of complex behavior. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann
Educational Books.
Clay, M. M. (1991). Becoming literate: The construction of inner control. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Clay, M. M. , & Imlach, R. H. (1971). Juncture, pitch and stress as reading behavior variables. Journal of Verbal
Learning and Verbal Behavior, 10, 133–139.
Clifton, C. Jr. , & Ferreira, F. (1987). Discourse structure and anaphora: Some experimental results. In M.
Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance 12 (pp. 635–654), Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
Clifton, C. Jr. , & Ferreira, F. (1989). Ambiguity in context. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, 77–104.
Clifton, C. Jr. , & Frazier, L. (1989). Comprehending sentences with long-distance dependencies. In G. Carlson
& M. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Linguistic structure in language processing (pp. 273–318). Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic.
Clifton, C. Jr. , Frazier, L. , & Connine, C. (1984). Lexical expectations in sentence comprehension. Journal of
Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23(6), 696–708.
Clifton, C. Jr. , Speer, S. , & Abney, S. (1991). Parsing arguments: Phrase structure and argument structure as
determinants of initial parsing decisions. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 251–271.
Clifton, C. Jr. , & Staub, A. (2008). Parallelism and competition in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Language and
Linguistics Compass, 2, 234–250.
Clifton, C. Jr. , Traxler, M. , Mohamed, M. T. , Williams, R. S. , Morris, R. K. , & Rayner, K. (2003). The use of
thematic role information in parsing: Syntactic processing autonomy revisited. Journal of Memory and
Language, 49, 317–334.
Cloutman, L. , Goettesman, R. , Chaudhry, P. , Davis, C. , Kleinman, J. T. , Pawlak, M. , et al. (2009a). Where
(in the brain) do semantic errors come from? Cortex, 45(5), 641–649.
Cloutman, L. , Newhart, M. , Davis, C. , Heidler-Gary, J. , & Hillis, A. E. (2009b). Acute recovery of oral word
production following stroke: Patterns of performance as predictors of recovery. Behavioural Neurology, 21
(3–4), 145–153.
Cobrinik, L. (1974). Unusual reading ability in severely disturbed children: Clinical observation and a
retrospective inquiry. Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia, 4(2), 163–175.
Cohen, A. S. (1974). Oral reading errors of first grade children taught by a code emphasis approach. Reading
Research Quarterly, 10, 616–650.
Cohen, L. , & Dehaene, S. (2009).Ventral and dorsal contributions to word reading. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.),
Cognitive neuroscience ( 4th ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Cohen, L. , Dehaene, S. , Naccache L. , Lehricy, S. , Dehaene-Lambertz, G. , Henaff, G. M. A. , et al. (2000).
The visual word form area: Spatial and temporal characterization of an initial stage of reading in normal
subjects and posterior split-brain patients. Brain, 123, 291–307.
Cohen, M. E. , & Ross, L. E. (1977). Saccade latency in children and adults: Effects of warning interval and
target eccentricity. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 23, 539–549.
Coltheart, M. (1978). Lexical access in simple reading tasks. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Strategies of information
processing. London: Academic Press.
Coltheart, M. (1980). Iconic memory and visual persistence. Perception & Psychophysics, 27, 183–228.
Coltheart, M. (1981). Disorders of reading and their implications for models of normal reading. Visible
Language, 15, 245–286.
Coltheart, M. (2005). Analyzing developmental disorders of reading. Advances in Speech Language Pathology,
7 (2), 49–57.
Coltheart, M. , Davelaar, E. , Jonasson, J. T. , & Besner, D. (1977). Access to the internal lexicon. In S. Dornic
(Ed.), Attention and performance VI. London: Academic Press.
Coltheart, M. , & Freeman, R. (1974). Case alternation impairs word recognition. Bulletin of the Psychonomic
Society, 3, 102–104.
Coltheart, M. , Patterson, K. , & Marshall, J. (1980). Deep dyslexia. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Coltheart, M. , & Rastle, K. (1994). Serial processing in reading aloud: Evidence for dual-route models of
reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(6), 1197–1211.
Coltheart, M. , Rastle, K. , Perry, C. , Langdon, R. , & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of
visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108, 204–256.
Coltheart, V. , Laxon, V. J. , Keating, G. C. , & Pool, M. M. (1986). Direct access and phonological encoding
processes in children’s reading: Effect of word characteristics. British Journal of Eductional Psychology, 56,
255–270.
Compton, D. L. (2003a). Modeling the relationship between growth in rapid naming speed and growth in
decoding skill in first-grade children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 225–239.
Compton, D. L. (2003b). The influence of item composition on RAN letter performance in first-grade children.
Journal of Special Education, 37(2), 81–94.
Compton, D. L. , Davis, C. J. , DeFries, J. C. , Gayan, J. , & Olson, R. K. (2001). Genetic and environmental
influences on reading and RAN: An overview of results from the Colorado Twin Study. In M. Wolf (Ed.),
Extraordinary brain series: Time, fluency, and developmental dyslexia (pp. 277–303). Baltimore, MD:York
Press.
Condry, S. M. , McMahon-Rideout, M. , & Levy, A. A. (1979). A developmental investigation of selective
attention to graphic, phonetic, and semantic information in words. Perception & Psychophysics, 25, 88–94.
Conrad, R. (1972). Speech and reading. In J. F. Kavanagh & I. Mattingly (Eds.), Language by ear and by eye.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Conrad, R. (1977). The reading ability of deaf school-leavers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 47,
138–148.
Content, A. , Kolinsky, R. , Morais, J. , & Bertelson, P. (1986). Phonetic segmentation in prereaders: Effect of
corrective information. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 42, 49–72.
Cooper, R. M. (1974). The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for
the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. Cognitive Psychology, 6 ,
84–107.
Corbett, A. T. , & Dosher, B. A. (1978). Instrument inferences in sentence encoding. Journal of Verbal Learning
and Verbal Behavior, 17, 479–491.
Corcoran, D. W. J. (1966). An acoustic factor in letter cancellation. Nature, 210, 658.
Corcoran, D. W. J. (1967). Acoustic factor in proofreading. Nature, 214, 851–852.
Coslett, H. B. (2000). Acquired dyslexia. In M. J. Farah , & T. E. Feinberg (Eds.), Patient-based approaches to
cognitive neuroscience (pp. 235–246). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Cowan, N. (1984). On short and long auditory stores. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 341–370.
Cowan, N. (2000). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87–185.
Cowles, H. W. , Kluender, R. , Kutas, M. , & Polinsky, M. (2007). Violations of information structure: An
electrophysiological study of answers to wh-questions. Brain and Language, 102, 228–242.
Craik, F. I. M. , & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of
Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684.
Crain, S. , & Steedman, M. (1985). On not being led up the garden path: The use of context by the
psychological parser. In D. Dowty , L. Karttunen , & A. Zwicky (Eds.), Natural language processing:
Psychological, computational, and theoretical perspectives. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Crisp, J. , & Ralph, M. A. L. (2006). Unlocking the nature of the phonological–deep dyslexia continuum: The
keys to reading aloud are in phonology and semantics. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(3), 348–362.
Crocker, M. (1995). Computational psycholinguistics: An interdisciplinary approach to the study of language.
Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Crowder, R. G. (1982). The psychology of reading: An introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Crowder, R. G. , & Wagner, R. K. (1992). The psychology of reading. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Cunningham, A. E. , Perry, K. E. , Stanovich, K. E. , & Share, D. L. (2002). Orthographic learning during
reading: Examining the role of self-teaching. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 82(3), 185–199.
Cunningham, A. E. , Perry, K. E. , Stanovich, K. E. , & Stanovich, P. J. (2004). Disciplinary knowledge of K-3
teachers and their knowledge calibration in the domain of early literacy. Annals of Dyslexia, 54, 139–167.
Cunningham, A. E. , & Stanovich, K. E. (1997). Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience
and ability 10 years later. Developmental Psychology, 33(6), 934–945.
Cunningham, T. J. , Healy, A. F. , Kanengiser, N. , Chizzick, L. , & Willitts, R. L. (1988). Investigating the
boundaries of reading units across ages and reading levels. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 45,
175–208.
Curtis, M. E. (1980). Development of components of reading skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72,
656–669.
Cutler, A. , & Clifton, C.,Jr. (1999). Blueprint of the listener. In P. Hagoort & C. Brown (Eds.), The
neurocognition of language (pp. 123–166). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Daneman, M. , & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading, Journal of
Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–466.
Daneman, M. , & Carpenter, P. A. (1983). Individual differences in integrating information between and within
sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 561–584.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). No child left behind and high school reform. Harvard Educational Review, 76(4),
642–667
Davis, C. J. (2010). The spatial coding model of visual word identification. Psychological Review, 117, 713–758.
Davis, C. J. , Perea, M. , & Acha, J. (2009). Re(de)fining the orthographic neighbourhood: The role of addition
and deletion neighbours in lexical decision and reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception and Performance, 35, 1550–1570.
de Abreu, M. D. , & Cardoso-Martins, C. (1998). Alphabetic access route in beginning reading acquisition in
Portuguese: The role of letter–name knowledge. Reading and Writing, 10(2), 85–104.
de Jong, P. F. , & van der Leij, A. (1999). Specific contributions of phonological abilities to early reading
acquisition: Results from a Dutch latent variable longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91,
450–476.
de Jong, P. F. , & Vrielink, L. O. (2004). Rapid automatic naming: Easy to measure, hard to improve (quickly).
Annals of Dyslexia, 54, 65–88.
DeFries, J. C. , & Gillis, J. J. (1991). Etiology of reading deficits in learning disabilities: Quantitative genetic
analysis. In J. E. Obrzut & G. W. Hynd (Eds.), Neuropsychological foundations of learning disabilities: A
handbook of issues, methods, and practice (pp. 29–47). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
DeFries, J. C. , Singer, S. M. , Foch, T. T. , & Lewitter, F. I. (1978). Familial nature of reading disability. British
Journal of Psychiatry, 132, 361–367.
Dehaene, S. (2009). Reading in the brain. Toronto, Canada:Viking Press.
Dehaene, S. , & Cohen, L. (2007). Cultural recycling of cortical maps. Neuron, 56, 384–398.
Demberg, V. , & Keller, F. (2008). Data from eye-tracking corpora as evidence for theories of syntactic
processing complexity. Cognition, 109, 193–210.
DenBuurman, R. , Boersma, T. , & Gerrissen, J. F. (1981). Eye movements and the perceptual span in reading.
Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 227–235.
Denckla, M. B. , & Rudel, R. (1976a). Naming of pictured objects by dyslexics and other learning disabled
children. Brain and Language 3, 1–15.
Denckla, M. B. , & Rudel, R. (1976b). Rapid “automatized” naming (RAN): Dylexia differentiated from other
learning disabilities. Neuropsychologia, 14, 471–479.
Denckla, M. B. , & Rudel, R. G. (1974). Rapid “automatized” naming of pictured objects, colors, letters and
numbers by normal children. Cortex, 10(2), 186–202.
Dennis, I. , Besner, D. , & Davelaar, E. (1985). Phonology is visual word recognition: Their is more two this than
meats the I. In D. Besner , T. G. Waller , & G. E. MacKinnon (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and
practice (Vol. 5). New York: Academic Press.
Deutsch, A. , Frost, R. , & Forster, K. I. (1998).Verbs and nouns are organized and accessed differently in the
mental lexicon: Evidence from Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition,
24 , 1238–1255.
Deutsch, A. , Frost, R. , Peleg, S. , Pollatsek, A. , & Rayner, K. (2003). Early morphological effects in reading:
Evidence from parafoveal preview benefit in Hebrew. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 415–422.
Deutsch, A. , Frost, R. , Pollatsek, A. , & Rayner, K. (2000). Early morphological effects in word recognition in
Hebrew: Evidence from parafoveal preview benefit. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 487–506.
Deutsch, A. , Frost, R. , Pollatsek, A. , & Rayner, K. (2005). Morphological parafoveal preview benefit effects in
reading: Evidence from Hebrew. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20, 341–371.
DeVincenzi, M. (1991). Syntactic parsing strategies in Italian. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Dickerson, J. , & Johnson, H. (2004). Sub-types of deep dyslexia: A case study of central deep dyslexia.
Neurocase, 10 (1), 39–47.
Diringer, D. (1962). Writing. London: Thames & Hudson.
Doctor, E. A. , & Coltheart, M. (1980). Children’s use of phonological encoding when reading for meaning.
Memory & Cognition, 8, 195–209.
Dodge, R. (1900).Visual perception during eye movement. Psychological Review, 7, 454–465.
Dodge, R. (1906). Recent studies in the correlation of eye movement and visual perception. Psychological
Bulletin, 13, 85–92.
Doehring, D. G. (1976). Acquisition of rapid reading responses. Monographs of the Society for Research in
Child Development, 41, No. 165.
Dolch, E. W. (1948). Helping handicapped children in school. Oxford, UK: Garrard Press.
Dolch, E. W. , & Bloomster, M. (1937). Phonic readiness. The Elementary School Journal, 38, 201–205.
Douglas, K. , & Montiel, E. (2008). Learning to read in American elementary school classrooms: Poverty and
the acquisition of reading skills. Retrieved from www.reading.org/Libraries/SRII/ECLS-K_SES_Report.sflb.ashx
Downing, J. , & Leong, C. K. (1982). Psychology of reading. New York: Macmillan.
Dowty, D. (1991). Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language, 67, 547–619.
Drake, W. E. (1968). Clinical and pathological findings in a child with a developmental learning disability.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1(9), 486–502.
Drewnowski, A. (1978). Detection errors on the word the: Evidence for the acquisition of reading levels.
Memory & Cognition, 6, 403–409.
Drewnowski, A. , & Healy, A. F. (1977). Detection errors on the and and: Evidence for reading units larger than
the word. Memory & Cognition, 5, 636–647.
Drewnowski, A. , & Healy, A. F. (1980). Missing -ing in reading: Letter detection errors in word endings. Journal
of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 247–262.
Drews, E. , & Zwitserlood, P. (1995). Morphological and orthographic similarity in visual word recognition.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 1098–1116.
Drieghe, D. (2011). Parafoveal-on-foveal effects in eye movements during reading. In S. P. Liversedge , I. D.
Gilchrist , & S. Everling (Eds.), Oxford handbook on eye movements (pp. 839–855). Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Drieghe, D. , Brysbaert, M. , Desmet, T. , & De Baecke, C. (2004). Word skipping in reading: On the interplay of
linguistic and visual factors. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16, 79–103.
Drieghe, D. , Pollatsek, A. , Juhasz, B. J. , & Rayner, K. (2010). Parafoveal processing during reading is
reduced across a morphological boundary. Cognition, 116, 136–142.
Drieghe, D. , Pollatsek, A. , Staub, A. , & Rayner, K. (2008). The word grouping hypothesis and eye movements
during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 1552–1560.
Drieghe, D. , Rayner, K. , & Pollatsek, A. (2005). Eye movements and word skipping during reading revisited.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 954–969.
Drieghe, D. , Rayner, K. , & Pollatsek A. (2008). Mislocated fixations can account for parafoveal-on-foveal
effects in eye movements during reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 1239–1249.
Duara, R. , Kushch, A. , Gross-Glenn, K. , & Barker, W. W. (1991). Neuroanatomic differences between
dyslexic and normal readers on magnetic resonance imaging scans. Archives of Neurology, 48(4), 410–416.
Duffy, S. A. (1986). Role of expectations in sentence integration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and Cognition, 12, 208–219.
Duffy, S. A. , Morris, R. K. , & Rayner, K. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of
Memory and Language, 27, 429–446.
Duffy, S. A. , & Rayner, K. (1990). Eye movements and anaphor resolution: Effects of antecedent typicality and
distance. Language and Speech, 33, 103–119.
Durkin, D. (1966). Children who read early. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
Durrell, D. D. (1958). First grade reading success study: A summary. Journal of Education, 140, 2–6.
Dyer, A. , MacSwenney, M. , Szczerbinski, M. , Green, L. , & Campbell, R. (2003). Predictors of reading delay
in deaf adolescents: The relative contributions of rapid automatized naming speed and phonological awareness
and decoding. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 8(3), 215.
Dyer, F. N. (1973). The Stroop phenomenon and its use in the study of perceptual, cognitive and response
processes. Memory & Cognition, 1, 106–120.
Dykstra, R. (1968). The effectiveness of code- and meaning-emphasis beginning reading programs. Reading
Teacher, 22(1), 17–23.
Edfeldt. A. W. (1960). Silent speech and silent reading. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Egeth, H. , Jonides, J. , & Wall, S. (1972). Parallel processing of multi-element displays. Cognitive Psychology,
3, 674–698.
Ehri, L. C. (1975). Word consciousness in readers and prereaders. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67,
204–212.
Ehri, L. C. (1976). Do words really interfere in naming pictures? Child Development, 47, 502–505.
Ehri, L. C. (1979). Linguistic insight: Threshold of reading acquisition. In T. W. Waller & G. E. MacKinnon
(Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice. New York: Academic Press.
Ehri, L. C. (1980). The role of orthography in printed word learning. In J. G. Kavanaugh & R. L. Venezky (Eds.),
Orthography, reading, and dyslexia. Baltimore: University Park Press.
Ehri, L. C. (1983). Influence of orthography of phonological and lexical awareness in beginning readers. In J.
Downing & R. Valtin (eds.), Language awareness and learning to read. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Ehri, L. C. (1992). Reconceptualizing the development of sight word reading and its relationship to recoding. In
P. B. Gough , L. C. Ehri , & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 107–143). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Ehri, L. C. (1998). Grapheme–phoneme knowledge is essential to learning to read words in English. In J. L.
Metsala , & L. C. Ehri (Eds.), Word recognition in beginning literacy (pp. 3–40). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Ehri, L. C. (1999). Phases of development in learning to read words. In J. Oakhill & R. Beard (Eds.), Reading
development and the teaching of reading: A psychological perspective (pp. 79–108). Oxford: Blackwell Science.
Ehri, L. C. (2002). Phases of acquisition in learning to read words and implications for teaching. In R. Stainthorp
& P. Tomlinson (Eds.), Learning and teaching reading. London: British Journal of Educational Psychology
Monograph Series II.
Ehri, L. C. , Nunes, S. R. , Stahl, S. A. , & Willows, D. M. (2001). Systematic phonics instruction helps students
learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71
(3), 393–447.
Ehri, L. C. , & Robbins, C. (1992). Beginners need some decoding skill to read words by analogy. Reading
Research Quarterly, 27(1), 12–26.
Ehri, L. C. , & Wilce, L. S. (1979). The mnemonic value of orthography among beginning readers. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 71, 26–40.
Ehri, L. C. , & Wilce, L. S. (1985). Movement into reading: Is the first stage of printed word learning visual or
phonetic? Reading Research Quarterly, 2, 163–179.
Ehri, L. E. , & Wilce, L. S. (1987a). Cipher versus cue reading: An experiment in decoding acquisition. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 79, 3–13.
Ehri, L. E. , & Wilce, L. S. (1987b). Does learning to spell help beginning readers learn to read words? Reading
Research Quarterly, 22, 47–65.
Ehrlich, K. (1980). Comprehension of pronouns. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 247–255.
Ehrlich, K. , & Rayner K. (1983) Pronoun assignment and semantic integration during reading: Eye movements
and immediacy of processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 75–87.
Ehrlich, S. F. (1981). Children’s word recognition in prose context. Visible Language, 15, 219–244.
Ehrlich, S. F. , & Rayner, K. (1981). Contextual effects on word perception and eye movements during reading.
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 641–655.
Eiter, B. M. , & Inhoff, A. W. (2010).Visual word recognition in reading is followed by subvocal articulation.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 36, 457–470.
Elbro, C. (1996). Early linguistic abilities and reading development. A review and a hypothesis. Reading and
Writing, 8(6), 453–485.
Elkind, D. , & Weiss, J. (1967). Studies in perceptual development. III: Perceptual exploration. Child
Development, 38 , 553–561.
Elkonin, D. B. (1973). U.S.S.R. In J. Downing (Ed.), Comparative reading (pp. 551–579). New York: Macmillan.
Ellis, A. W. (1984). Reading, writing and dyslexia: A cognitive analysis. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Ltd.
Ellis, N. C. , & Hooper, A. M. (2001). Why learning to read is easier in Welsh than in English: Orthographic
transparency effects evinced with frequency-matched tests. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22(4), 571–599.
Elman, J. L. , Hare, M. , & McRae, K. (2004). Cues, constraints, and competition in sentence processing. In M.
Tomasello & D. Slobin (Eds.), Beyond nature–nuture: Essays in honor of Elizabeth Bates. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Engbert, R. , Nuthmann, A. , Richter, E. , & Kliegl, R. (2005). SWIFT: A dynamical model of saccade generation
during reading. Psychological Review, 112, 777–813.
Erdmann, B. , & Dodge, R. (1898). Psychologische Untersuchungen uber das Lesen. Halle, Germany: M.
Niemeyer.
Erickson, D. , Mattingly, I. G. , & Turvey, M. T. (1977). Phonetic activity in reading: An experiment with Kanji.
Language and Speech, 20, 384–403.
Erickson, T. D. , & Mattson, M. E. (1981). From words to meaning: A semantic illusion. Journal of Verbal
Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 540–551.
Evans, M. A. , & Carr, T. H. (1985). Cognitive abilities, conditions of learning, and the early development of
reading skill. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(3), 327–350.
Evans, M. A. , & Saint-Aubin, J. (2005). What children are looking at during shared storybook reading: Evidence
from eye movement monitoring. Psychological Science, 16, 913–920.
Evans, M. A. , Shaw, D. , & Bell, M. (2000). Home literacy activities and their influence on early literacy skills.
Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54(2), 65–75.
Evett, L. J. , & Humphreys, G. W. (1981). The use of abstract graphemic information in lexical access. Quarterly
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 325–350.
Eysenck, M. W. , & Keane, M. T. (2010). Cognitive psychology: A student’s handbook (6th ed.). Hove, UK:
Psychology Press.
Ezell, H. K. , & Justice, L. M. (2000). Increasing the print focus of adult–child shared book reading through
observational learning. American Journal of Speech–Language Pathology, 9, 36–47.
Feinberg, R. (1949). A study of some aspects of peripheral visual acuity. American Journal of Optometry and
Archives of the American Annals of Optometry, 26, 49–56, 105–119.
Feitelson, D. , & Razel, M. (1984). Word superiority and word shape effects in beginning readers. International
Journal of Behavioral Development, 7, 359–370.
Feldman, L. B. (2000). Are morphological effects distinguishable from the effects of shared meaning and
shared form? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1431–1444.
Feldman, L. B. , & Turvey, M. T. (1983). Word recognition in Serbo-Croatian is phonologically analytic. Journal
of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 288–298.
Felton, R. H. , Naylor, C. E. , & Wood, F. B. (1990). Neuropsychological profile of adult dyslexics. Brain and
Language, 39(4), 485–497.
Felton, R. H. , Wood, F. B. , Brown, I. B. , Campbell, S. K. & Harter, M. R. (1987). Separate verbal memory and
naming deficits in attention deficit disorder and reading disability. Brain & Language, 31, 171–184.
Ferguson, H. J. , & Sanford, A. (2008). Anomalies in real and counterfactual worlds: An eye-movement
investigation. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 609–626.
Ferreira, F. (2003). The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 164–203.
Ferreira, F. , Bailey, K. G. D. , & Ferraro, V. (2002). Good-enough representations in language comprehension.
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 11–14.
Ferreira, F. , & Clifton C. Jr. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and
Language, 25 , 75–87.
Ferreira, F. , & Henderson, J. (1990). The use of verb information in syntactic parsing: Evidence from eye
movements and word-by-word self-paced reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 16, 555–568.
Ferreira, F. , & Patson, N. D. (2007). The ‘good enough’ approach to language comprehension. Language and
Linguistics Compass, 1, 71–83.
Ferretti, T. R. , Kutas, M. , & McRae, K. (2007).Verb aspect and the activation of event knowledge. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 182–196.
Ferretti, T. R. , McRae, K. , & Hatherell, A. (2001). Integrating verbs, situation schemas, and thematic role
concepts. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 516–548.
Fielding-Barnsley, R. , & Purdie, N. (2005). Teachers’ attitude to and knowledge of metalinguistics in the
process of learning to read. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 33(1), 65–76.
Filik, R. , Paterson, K. B. , & Liversedge, S. P. (2005). Parsing with focus particles in context: Eye movements
during the processing of relative clause ambiguities. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 473–495.
Fine, E. M. , & Rubin, G. S. (1999). Reading with a central field loss: number of letters masked is more
important than the size of the mask in degrees. Vision Research, 39, 747–756.
Fischer, I. , & Bloom, P. (1979). Automatic and attentional processes in the effects of sentence context on word
recognition. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 1–20.
Fisher, D. F. (1979). Dysfunctions in reading disability: There’s more than meets the eye. In L. B. Resnick & P.
A. Weaver , (Eds.), Theory and practice of early reading (Vol. 1). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Inc.
Fisher, D. F. , & Montanary, S. P. (1977). Spatial and contextual factors in beginning reading: Evidence for
PSG-CSG complements to developing automaticity? (pp. 247–251). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Inc.
Fisher, D. G. (1983). An experimental study of eye movements during reading. Unpublished manuscript. Murray
Hill, NJ: Bell Laboratories.
Fisher, S. E. , & DeFries, J. C. (2002). Developmental dyslexia: Genetic dissection of a complex cognitive trait.
Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3, 767–780.
Fisher, S. E. , Stein, J. F. , & Monaco, A. P. (1999). A genome-wide search strategy for identifying quantitative
trait loci involved in reading and spelling disability (developmental dyslexia). European Child & Adolescent
Psychiatry, 8(3), III–47–III/51.
Fletcher, J. M. , Foorman, B. R. , Francis, D. J. , Shaywitz, B. A. , & Shaywitz, S. E. (1994). Treatment of
dyslexia. In K. P. van den Bos , L. S. Siegel , D. J. Baker , & D. L. Share (Eds.), Current directions in dyslexia
research (pp. 223–233). Lisse, Switzerland: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Fletcher, J. M. , Lyon, G. R. , Barnes, M. , Stuebing, K. K. , Francis, D. J. , Olson, R. , et al. (2002).
Classification of learning disabilities: An evidenced-based evaluation. In R. Bradley , L. Danielson , & D.
Hallahan (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 185–250). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Fletcher, J. M. , Lyon, G. R. , Fuchs, L. S. , & Barnes, M. A. (2007). Learning disabilities: From identification to
intervention. New York: Guilford Press.
Fletcher, J. M. , Shaywitz, S. E. , Shankweiler, D. P. , Katz, L. , Liberman, I. Y. , Stuebing, K. K. , et al. (1994).
Cognitive profiles of reading disability: Comparisons of discrepancy and low achievement definitions. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 86, 6–23.
Fodor, J. A. (1983). Modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fodor, J. A. , Bever, T. G. , & Garrett, M. (1974). The psychology of language. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fodor, J. D. (2002). Prosodic disambiguation in silent reading. In M. Hirotani , (Ed.), Proceedings of the North
East Linguistics Society (Vol. 32, pp. 112–132). Amherst, MA: GSLA.
Fodor, J. D. , & Ferreira, F. (Eds.). (1998). Sentence reanalysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Folk, J. R. (1999). Phonological codes are used to access the lexicon during silent reading. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 892–906.
Folk, J. R. , & Morris, R. K. (1995). Multiple lexical codes in reading: Evidence from eye movements, naming
time, and oral reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1412–1429.
Fontenelle, S. , & Alarcon, M. (1982). Hyperlexia: Precocious word recognition in developmentally delayed
children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 55, 247–252.
Foorman, B. R. , Francis, D. J. , Fletcher, J. M. , & Lynn, A. (1996). Relation of phonological and orthographic
processing to early reading: Comparing two approaches to regression-based, reading-level match designs.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 639–652.
Foorman, B. R. , Francis, D. J. , Fletcher, J. M. , Schatschneider, C. , & Mehta, P. (1998). The role of instruction
in learning to read: Preventing reading failure in at-risk children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 37–55.
Ford, M. , Bresnan, J. , & Kaplan, R. (1982). A competence-based theory of syntactic closure. In J. Bresnan
(Ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Forster, K. I. (1976). Accessing the mental lexicon. In R. J. Wales & E. C. T. Walker (Eds.), New approach to
language mechanisms. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Forster, K. I. (1979). Levels of processing and the structure of the language processor. In W. E. Cooper & E.
Walker (Eds.), Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Forster, K. I. , & Azuma, T. (2000). Masked priming for prefixed words with bound stems: Does submit prime
permit? Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 539–562.
Forster, K. I. , & Davis, C. (1984). Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 680–698.
Foss, D. J. (1982). A discourse on semantic priming. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 590–607.
Fountas, I. C. , & Pinnell, G. S. (1996). Guided reading: Good first teaching for all children. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann
Fountas, I. C. , & Pinnell, G. S. (2006). Teaching for comprehending and fluency: Thinking, talking, and writing
about reading, K-8. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Fountas, I. C. , & Pinnell, G. S. (2008). When readers struggle: Teaching that works. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Fowler, A. E. (1991). How early phonological development might set the stage for phoneme awareness. In S. A.
Brady & D. P. Shankweiler (Eds.), Phonological processes in literacy: A tribute to Isabelle Y. Liberman (pp.
97–117). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Fowler, C. , Wolford, G. , Slade, R. , & Tassinary, L. (1981). Lexical access with and without awareness.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 110, 341–362.
Fox, B. , & Routh, D. K. (1975). Analyzing spoken language into words, syllables, and phonemes: A
developmental study. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 4, 331–342.
Fox, B. , & Routh, D. K. (1976). Phonetic analysis and synthesis as word attack skills. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 68, 70–74.
Fox, B. , & Routh, D. K. (1984). Phonemic analysis and synthesis as word attack skills: Revisited. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 76, 1059–1064.
Francis, D. J. , Shaywitz, S. E. , Stuebing, K. K. , Shaywitz, B. A. , & Fletcher, J. M. (1996). Developmental lag
versus deficit models of reading disability: A longitudinal, individual growth curves analysis. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 88(1), 3–17.
Francis, W. N. , & Kučera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin.
Frazier, L. (1979). On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. Bloomington, IN: Indiana
University Linguistics Club.
Frazier, L. (1983). Processing sentence structure. In K. Rayner (Ed.), Eye movements in reading: Perceptual
and language processes (pp. 215–236). New York: Academic Press.
Frazier, L. (1987). Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart , (Ed.), Attention and performance
XII. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Frazier, L. (1989). Against lexical generation of syntax. In W. Marslen-Wilson (Ed.), Lexical representation and
process (pp. 505–528). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Frazier, L. (1990). Exploring the architecture of the language system. In G. Altmann (Ed.), Cognitive models of
speech processing: Psycholinguistic and computational perspectives (pp. 409–433). Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Frazier, L. (1995). Constraint satisfaction as a theory of sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic
Research, 24 , 437–468.
Frazier, L. (1999). On sentence interpretation. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Frazier, L. (2008). Is good-enough parsing good enough? In L. Arcuri , P. Boscolo , & F. Peressotti (Eds.),
Cognition and language: A long story. Festschrift in honour of Ino Flores d'Arcais (pp. 13–29). Department of
Psychology, University of Padua.
Frazier, L. , Carlson, K. , & Clifton, C. Jr. (2006). Prosodic phrasing is central to language comprehension.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 244–249.
Frazier, L. , & Clifton, C.,Jr. (1996). Construal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Frazier, L. , & Clifton, C. Jr. (2005). The syntax–discourse divide: Processing ellipsis. Syntax, 8, 154–207.
Frazier, L. , & Clifton, C. Jr. (2011). Quantifiers undone: Reversing predictable speech errors in comprehension.
Language, 87, 158–171.
Frazier, L. , & Flores d'Arcais, G. B. (1989). Filler driven parsing: A study of gap filling in Dutch. Journal of
Memory and Language, 28, 331–344.
Frazier, L. & Fodor, J. D. (1978). The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition, 6,
291–326.
Frazier, L. , Pacht, J. M. , & Rayner, K. (1999). Taking on semantic commitments. II: Collective versus
distributive readings. Cognition, 70, 87–104.
Frazier, L. , & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye
movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 178–210.
Frazier, L. , & Rayner, K. (1987). Resolution of syntactic category ambiguities: Eye movements in parsing
lexically ambiguous sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 505–526.
Frederiksen, J. R. (1982). A componential model of reading skills and their interrelations. In R. J. Sternberg
(Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Friedman, R. B. , & Perlman, M. B. (1982). On the underlying causes of semantic paralexias in a patient with
deep dyslexia. Neuropsychologia, 20, 559–568.
Frisson, S. , & McElree, B. (2008). Complement coercion is not modulated by competition: Evidence from eye
movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 34, 1–11.
Frisson, S. , Niswander-Klement, E. , & Pollatsek, A. (2008). The role of semantic transparency in the
processing of English compound words. British Journal of Psychology, 99, 87–107.
Frisson, S. , Rayner, K. , & Pickering, M. J. (2005). Effects of contextual predictability and transitional
probability on eye movements during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 31, 862–877.
Frith, U. (1980). Cognitive processes in spelling. London: Academic Press.
Frith, U. , & Snowling, M. (1983). Reading for meaning and reading for sound in autistic and dyslexic children.
British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 1(4), 329–342.
Frost, R. , Forster, K. I. , & Deutsch, A. (1997). What can we learn from the morphology of Hebrew: A masked
priming investigation of morphological representation? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory,
and Cognition, 23, 829–856.
Frost, S. J. , Sandak, R. , Mencl, W. E. , Landi, N. , Rueckl, J. G. , Katz, L. , et al. (2009). Mapping the word
reading circuitry in skilled and disabled readers. In K. Pugh & P. McCardle (Eds.), How children learn to read:
Current issues and new directions in the integration of cognition, neurobiology and genetics of reading and
dyslexia research and practice (pp. 3–19). New York: Psychology Press.
Funnell, E. (1983). Phonological processes in reading: New evidence from acquired dyslexia. British Journal of
Psychology, 74, 159–180.
Furnes, B. , & Samuelsson, S. (2010). Predicting reading and spelling difficulties in transparent and opaque
orthographies: A comparison between Scandinavian and US/Australian children. Dyslexia: An International
Journal of Research and Practice, 16(2), 119–142.
Gabrieli, J. D. (2009). Dyslexia: A new synergy between education and cognitive neuroscience. Science, 325,
280–283.
Galaburda, A. M. , & Kemper, T. L. (1979). Cytoarchitectonic abnormalities in developmental dyslexia: a case
study. Annals of Neurology, 6(2), 94–100.
Gallagher, A. , Frith, U. , & Snowling, M. J. (2000). Precursors of literacy delay among children at genetic risk of
dyslexia. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41(2), 202–213.
Garlock, V. M. , Walley, A. C. , & Metsala, J. L. (2001). Age of acquisition, word frequency, and neighborhood
density in spoken word recognition by children and adults. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 468–492.
Garnham, A. (1987). Mental models as representations of discourse and text. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Garnham, A. (1999). Reference and anaphora. In S. Garrod & M. J. Pickering (Eds.), Language processing (pp.
335–362). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Garnsey, S. M. , Pearlmutter, N. J. , Myers, E. , & Lotocky, M. A. (1997). The contributions of verb bias and
plausibility to the comprehension of temporarily–ambiguous sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 37 ,
58–93.
Garrett, M. F. (1976). Syntactic processes in sentence production. In R. J. Wales & E. Walker (Eds.), New
approaches to language mechanisms. A collection of psycholinguistic studies. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Garrity, L. I. (1977). Electromyography: A review of the current status of subvocal speech research. Memory &
Cognition, 5, 615–622.
Garrod, S. , O'Brien, E. J. , Morris, R. K. , & Rayner, K. (1990). Elaborative inferencing as an active or passive
process. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 250–257.
Garrod, S. , & Sanford, A. J. (1977). Interpreting anaphoric relations: The integration of semantic information
while reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 77–90.
Garrod, S. , & Sanford, A. J. (1982). The mental representation of discourse in a focused memory system:
Implications for the interpretation of anaphoric noun-phrases. Journal of Semantics, 1, 21–41.
Garrod, S. , & Sanford, A. J. (1983). Topic dependent effects in language processing. In G. B. F. d'Arcais & R.
J. Jarvella (Eds.), The process of language understanding. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Garrod, S. , & Terras, M. (2000). The contribution of lexical and situation knowledge to resolving discourse
roles: Bonding and resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 526–544.
Gaskell, M. G. (Ed.). (2007). The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gayán, J. , & Olson, R. K. (2001). Genetic and environmental influences on orthographic and phonological
skills in children with reading disabilities. Developmental Neuropsychology, 20(2), 483–507.
Gelb, I. J. (1963). A study of writing, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gennari, S. P. , & Poeppel, D. (2003). Processing correlates of lexical syntactic complexity. Cognition, 89,
B27–B41.
Gerhand, S. , & Barry, C. (2000). When does a deep dyslexic make a semantic error? The roles of age-of-
acquisition, concreteness, and frequency. Brain and Language, 74(1), 26–47.
Gerrig, R. J. , & McKoon, G. (1998). The readiness is all: The functionality of memory-based text processing.
Discourse Processes, 26, 67–86.
Geschwind, N. , & Levitsky, W. (1968). Human brain: Left–right asymmetries in temporal speech region.
Science, 161(3837), 186–187.
Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 1–76.
Gibson, E. J. (1965). Learning to read. Science, 148, 1066–1072.
Gibson, E. J. (1971). Perceptual learning and the theory of word perception. Cognitive Psychology, 2, 351–368.
Gibson, E. J. , & Levin, H. (1975). The psychology of reading. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gilger, J. W. , Hanebuth, E. , Smith, S. D. , & Pennington, B. F. (1996). Differential risk for developmental
reading disorders in the offspring of compensated versus noncompensated parents. Reading and Writing, 8 (5),
407–417.
Gilger, J. W. , Pennington, B. F. , & DeFries, J. C. (1991). Risk for reading disability as a function of parental
history in three family studies. In B. Pennington (Ed.), Reading disabilities: Genetic and neurological influences.
Boston : Kluwer Academic.
Gillon, G. , & Dodd, B. J. (1994). A prospective study of the relationship between phonological, semantic and
syntactic skills and specific reading disability. Reading and Writing, 6(4), 321–345.
Giraudo, H. , & Grainger, J. (2001). Priming complex words: Evidence for supralexical representation of
morphology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 127–131.
Gleitman, L. R. , & Rozin, P. (1977). The structure and acquisition of reading I: Relations between
orthographies and the structure of language. In A. S. Reber & D. L. Scarborough (Eds.), Toward a psychology
of reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Glenberg, A. M. , Meyer, M. , & Lindem, K. (1987). Mental models contribute to foregrounding during text
comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 69–83.
Glock, M. D. (1949). The effect upon eye-movements and reading rate at the college level of three methods of
training. Journal of Educational Psychology, 40, 93–106.
Glosser, G. , & Friedman, R. B. (1990). The continuum of deep/phonological alexia. Cortex, 26(3), 343–359.
Glushko, R. J. (1979). The organization and activation of orthographic knowledge in reading aloud. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 674–691.
Glushko, R. J. (1981). Principles for pronouncing print: The psychology of phonography. In A. M. Lesgold & C.
A. Perfetti (Eds.), Interactive processes in reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Godfrey, J. J. , Syrdal-Lasky, A. K. , Millay, K. K. , & Knox, C. M. (1981). Performance of dyslexic children on
speech perception tests. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 32(3), 401–424.
Goldberg, T. E. (1987). On hermetic reading abilities. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 17(1),
29–44.
Goldin-Meadow, S. , & Mayberry, R. I. (2001). How do profoundly deaf children learn to read? Learning
Disabilities Research and Practice, 16(4), 222–229.
Golinkoff, R. M. (1976). A comparison of reading comprehension processes in good and poor comprehenders.
Reading Research Quarterly, 11, 623–669.
Golinkoff, R. M. (1978). Critique: Phonemic awareness skills and reading achievement. In F. B. Murray & J. J.
Pikulski (Eds.), The acquisition of reading: Cognitive, linguistic and perceptual prerequisites. Baltimore, MD:
University Park Press.
Golinkoff, R. M. , & Rosinski, R. R. (1976). Decoding, semantic processing, and reading comprehension skill.
Child Development, 47, 252–258.
Gómez, P. , Ratcliff, R. , & Perea, M. (2008). The overlap model: A model of letter position coding.
Psychological Review, 115, 577–601.
Goodman, K. S. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist, 6,
126–135.
Goodman, K. S. (1970). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. In H. Singer & R. B. Ruddell , R.B. (Eds.),
Theoretical models and processes of reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Goodman, K. S. (1993). Phonics phacts. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Gordon, P. C. , Grosz, B. J. , & Gilliom, L. A. (1993). Pronouns, nouns, and the centering of attention in
discourse. Cognitive Science, 17, 311–349.
Gordon, P. C. , & Hendrick, R. (1997). Intuitive knowledge of linguistic co-reference. Cognition, 62, 325–370.
Gordon, P. C. , & Hendrick, R. (1998). The representation and processing of co-reference in discourse.
Cognitive Science, 22, 389–424.
Gordon, P. C. , Hendrick, R. , & Johnson, M. (2001). Memory interference during language processing. Journal
of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 1411–1423.
Goswami, U. (1986). Children’s use of analogy in learning to read: A developmental study. Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 42, 73–83.
Goswami, U. (1993). Toward an interactive analogy model of reading development: Decoding vowel
graphemes in beginning reading. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 56, 443–475.
Goswami, U. (2000). Phonological and lexical processes. In M. L. Kamil , P. B. Mosenthal , P. D. Pearson , &
R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 251–267). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Inc.
Goswami, U. (2005). Synthetic phonics and learning to read: A cross-language perspective. Educational
Psychology in Practice, 21(4), 273–282.
Goswami, U. , & Bryant, P. (1990). Phonological skills and learning to read. Essays in developmental
psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Goswami, U. , Ziegler, J. C. , Dalton, L. , & Schneider, W. (2001). Pseudohomophone effects and phonological
recoding procedures in reading development in English and German. Journal of Memory and Language, 45,
648–664.
Goswami, U. , Ziegler, J. C. , Dalton, L. , & Schneider, W. (2003). Nonword reading across orthographies: How
flexible is the choice of reading units? Applied Psycholinguistics, 24(2), 235–247.
Gough, P. B. (1972). One second of reading. In J. F. Kavanagh & I. G. Mattingly (Eds.), Language by ear and
by eye. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gough, P. B. , Alford, J. A. , & Holley-Wilcox, P. (1981). Words and contexts. In O. L. Tzeng & H. Singer (Eds.),
Perception of print: Reading research in experimental psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gough, P. B. , & Hillinger, M. L. (1980). Learning to read: An unnatural act. Bulletin of the Orton Society, 20,
179–196.
Gough, P. B. , & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. RASE: Remedial & Special
Education, 7(1), 6–10.
Graesser, A. C. , Singer, M. , & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text
comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371–395.
Grainger, J. (1990). Word frequency and neighborhood frequency effects in lexical decision and naming.
Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 228–244.
Grainger, J. , Cole, P. , & Segui, J. (1991). Masked morphological priming in visual word recognition. Journal of
Memory and Language, 30, 370–384.
Grainger, J. , & Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out
model. Psychological Review, 103, 518–565.
Grainger, J. , Rey, A. , & Dufau, S. (2008). Letter perception: From pixels to pandemonium. Trends in Cognitive
Science, 12, 381–387.
Grainger, J. , & Segui, J. (1990). Neighborhood frequency effects in visual word recognition: A comparison of
lexical decision and masked identification latencies. Perception & Psychophysics, 47, 191–198.
Grainger, J. , & Whitney, C. (2004). Does the huamn mnid raed wrods as a whole? Trends in Cognitive
Sciences, 8 , 58–59.
Green, R. L. , Hustler, J. J. , Loftus, W. C. , Tramo, M. J. , Thomas, C. E. , Silberfarb, A. W. , et al. (1999). The
caudal infrasylvian surface in dyslexia: Novel magnetic resonance imaging-based findings. Neurology, 53,
974–981.
Greenberg, S. N. , Inhoff, A. W. , & Weger, U. W. (2006). The impact of letter detection on eye movement
patterns during reading: Reconsidering lexical analysis in connected text as a function of task. Quarterly
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 987–995.
Griffiths, Y. M. , & Snowling, M. J. (2002). Predictors of exception word and nonword reading in dyslexic
children: The severity hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 34–43.
Grigorenko, E. L. , Klin, A. , Pauls, D. L. , Senft, R. , Hooper, C. , & Volkmar, F. (2002). A descriptive study of
hyperlexia in a clinically referred sample of children with developmental delays. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 32(1), 3–12.
Grigorenko, E. L. , Klin, A. , & Volkmar, F. (2003). Hyperlexia: Disability or superability? Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 44(8), 1079–1091.
Groff, P. (1975). Research in brief: Shapes as cues to word recognition. Visible Language, 9, 67–71.
Groll, S. L. , & Ross, L. E. (1982). Saccadic eye movements of children and adults to double-step stimuli.
Developmental Psychology, 18, 108–123.
Grosz, B. , Joshi, A. , & Weinstein, S. (1983). Providing a unified account of definite noun phrases in discourse.
Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 44–50). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Grosz, B. J. , Joshi, A. K. , & Weinstein, S. (1995). Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of
discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21, 203–225.
Grundin, H. (1994). If it ain’t whole, it ain’t language––or back to the basics of freedom and dignity. In F. Lehr &
J. Osborn (Eds.), Reading, language, and literacy (pp. 77–88). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Guttentag, R. E. , & Haith, M. M. (1978). Automatic processing as a function of age and reading ability. Child
Development, 49, 707–716.
Haber, R. N. (1983). The impending demise of the icon: A critique of the concept of iconic storage in visual
information processing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6, 1–54.
Haber, R. N. , & Haber, L. R. (1981). The shape of a word can specify its meaning. Reading Research
Quarterly, 16 , 334–345
Haber, R. N. , & Haber, L. R. (1982). Does silent reading involve articulation? Evidence from tongue-twisters.
American Journal of Psychology, 95, 409–419.
Haber, R. N. , & Schindler, R. M. (1981). Error in proofreading: Evidence of syntactic control of letter
processing? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 573–579.
Haberlandt, K. (1982). Reader expectations in text comprehension. In J. F. L. Ny & W. Kintsch (Eds.),
Language comprehension (pp. 239–249). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Häikiö, T. , Bertram, R. , Hyönä, J. , & Niemi, P. (2009). Development of the letter identity span in reading:
Evidence from the eye movement moving window paradigm. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 102,
167–181.
Halderman, L. K. , Ashby, J. , & Perfetti, C. A. (2012). Phonology: An early and integral role in identifying words.
In J. S. Adelman (Ed.), Visual word recognition. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Hale, J. (2006). Uncertainty about the rest of the sentence. Cognitive Science, 30, 643–672.
Hallgren, B. (1950). Specific dyslexia (“congenital word-blindness”): A clinical and genetic study. Acta
Psychiatrica et Neurologica, Suppl.65, 1–287.
Halliday, M. A. K. , & Hasan, R. O. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Hanson, V. , Goodell, E. W. , & Perfetti, C. (1991). Tongue-twister effects in the silent reading of hearing and
deaf college students. Journal of Memory and Language, 30(3), 319.
Hanson, V. L. , & Fowler, C. A. (1987). Phonological coding in word reading: Evidence from hearing and deaf
readers. Memory & Cognition, 15, 199–207.
Hardyck, C. D. , & Petrinovich, L. F. (1970). Subvocal speech and comprehension level as a function of the
difficulty level of reading material. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 647–652.
Hardyck, C. D. , Petrinovich, L. F. , & Ellsworth, D. W. (1966). Feedback of speech muscle activity during silent
reading: Rapid extinction. Science, 154, 1467–l468.
Harm, M. W. , & Seidenberg, M. S. (1999). Phonology, reading acquisition, and dyslexia: Insights from
connectionist models. Psychological Review, 106(3), 491–528.
Harm, M. W. , & Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: Cooperative division
of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review, 111, 662–720.
Harmon-Vukic, M. , Guéraud, S. , Lassonde, K. A. , & O'Brien, E. J. (2009). The activation and instantiation of
predictive inferences. Discourse Processes, 46, 467–490.
Harris, M. , & Moreno, C. (2004). Deaf children’s use of phonological coding: Evidence from reading, spelling,
and working memory. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 9, 253–268.
Hasselhorn, M. , & Grube, D. (2003). The phonological similarity effect on memory span in children: Does it
depend on age, speech rate, and articulatory suppression? International Journal of Behavioral Development,
27 (2), 145–152.
Hatcher, P. J. , & Hulme, C. (1999). Phonemes, rhymes, and intelligence as predictors of children’s
responsiveness to remedial reading instruction: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Journal of Experimental
Child Psychology, 72(2), 130–153.
Hatcher, P. J. , Hulme, C. , & Ellis, A. W. (1994). Ameliorating early reading failure by integrating the teaching
of reading and phonological skills: The phonological linkage hypothesis. Child Development, 65(1), 41–57.
Hatcher, P. J. , Snowling, M. J. , & Griffiths, Y. M. (2002). Cognitive assessment of dyslexic students in higher
education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(1), 119–133.
Haviland, S. E. , & Clark, H. H. (1974). What’s new? Acquiring new information as a process in comprehension.
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 512–521.
Hawelka, S. , Gagl, B. , & Wimmer, H. (2010). A dual-route perspective on eye movements of dyslexic readers.
Cognition, 115, 367–379.
Hawkins, H. L. , Reicher, G. M. , Rogers, M. , & Peterson, L. (1976). Flexible coding in work recognition.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2, 380–385.
Healy, A. F. (1976). Detection errors on the word the: Evidence for reading units larger than letters. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 2, 235–242.
Healy, A. F. (1980). Proofreading errors on the word the: New evidence on reading units. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6, 45–57.
Healy, A. F. , & Drewnowski, A. (1983). Investigation the boundaries of reading units: Letter detection in
misspelled words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 413–426,
Healy, J. M. , Aram, D. M. , Horowitz, S. J. , & Kessler, J. W. (1982). A study of hyperlexia. Brain and
Language, 17 (1), 1–23.
Heath, S. M. , Hogben, J. H. , & Clark, C. D. (1999). Auditory temporal processing in disabled readers with and
without oral language delay. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40(4), 637–647.
Heim, I. , & Kratzer, A. (1998). Semantics in generative grammar. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Helenius, P. , Tarkiainen, A. , Cornelissen, P. , Hansen, P. C. , & Salmelin, R. (1999). Dissociation of normal
feature analysis and deficient processing of letter-strings in dyslexic adults. Cerebral Cortex, 9(5), 476–483.
Helfgott, J. (1976). Phonemic segmentation and blending skills of kindergarten children: Implications for
beginning reading acquisition, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 1, l57–l69.
Hemforth, B. , & Konieczny, L. (2000). German sentence processing. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Henderson, J. M. , Dixon, P. , Petersen, A. , Twilley, L. C. , & Ferreira, F. (1995). Evidence for the use of
phonological representations during transaccadic word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Human Perception and Performance, 21, 82–97.
Henderson, J. M. , & Ferreira, F. (1990). Effects of foveal processing difficulty on the perceptual span in
reading: Implications for attention and eye movement control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and Cognition, 16, 417–429.
Henderson, J. M. , Weeks, P. A. , & Hollingworth, A. (1999). The effects of semantic consistency on eye
movements during complex scene viewing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance, 25 , 210–228.
Henderson, L. (1982). Orthography and word recognition in reading. New York: Academic Press.
Henderson, L. (1984). Orthographies and reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Hill, E. L. (2001). Non-specific nature of specific language impairment: A review of the literature with regard to
concomitant motor impairments. Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 36, 149–171.
Hintzman, D. L. , Carre, F. A. , Eskridge, V. L. , Owens, A. M. , Shaff , S. S. , & Sparks, M. E. (1972). “Stroop”
effect: Input or output phenomenon? Journal of Experimental Psychology, 95, 458–459.
Hirotani, M. , Frazier, L. , & Rayner, K. (2006). Punctuation and intonation effects on clause and sentence wrap-
up: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 425–443.
Hochberg, J. (1970). Components of literacy: Speculations and exploratory research. In H. Levin & J. P.
Williams (Eds.), Basic studies on reading. New York: Basic Books.
Hoffmeister, R. J. (2000). A piece of the puzzle: ASL and reading comprehension in deaf children. In C.
Chamberlain , J. P. Morford , & R. I. Mayberry (Eds.), Language acquisition by eye (pp. 143–163). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Hohenstein, S. , Laubrock, J. , & Kliegl, R. (2010). Semantic preview benefit in eye movements during reading:
A parafoveal fast-priming study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36,
1150–1170.
Holden, M. H. , & MacGinitie, W. H. (1972). Children’s conceptions of word boundaries in speech and print.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 551–557.
Holender, D. (1986). Semantic activation without conscious indentification in dichotic listening, parafoveal
vision, and visual masking: A survey and appraisal. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 9, 1–66.
Holt, E. B. (1903). Eye-movement and central anaesthesia. Psychological Monographs, 4, 3–48.
Hoover, W. A. , & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2, 127–160.
Hornby, P. A. (1974). Surface structure and presupposition. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,
13, 530–538.
Hoskyn, M. , & Swanson, H. L. (2000). Cognitive processing of low achievers and children with reading
disabilities: A selective meta-analytic review of the published literature. School Psychology Review, 29(1),
102–119.
Hu, C. F. , & Catts, H. W. (1998). The role of phonological processing in early reading ability: What we can
learn from Chinese. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2(1), 55–79.
Hubel, D. H. , & Wiesel, T. N. (1962). Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the
cat’s visual cortex. Journal of Physiology, 160, 106–154.
Huey, E. B. (1908). The psychology and pedagogy of reading. New York: Macmillan. [Republished: Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press, 1968.]
Hulme, C. , & Snowling, M. (1992). Deficits in output phonology: An explanation of reading failure? Cognitive
Neuropsychology, 9(1), 47–72.
Hulme, C. , & Snowling, M. (1994). Reading development and dyslexia. London: Whurr Publishers.
Hulme, C. , Snowling, M. , Caravolas, M. , & Carroll, J. (2005). Phonological skills are (probably) one cause of
success in learning to read: A comment on Castles and Coltheart. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9(4), 351–365.
Hulslander, J. , Talcott, J. , Witton, C. , DeFries, J. , Pennington, B. , Wadsworth, S. , et al. (2004). Sensory
processing, reading, IQ, and attention. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 88(3), 274–295.
Humphreys, G. W. , & Evett, L. J. (1985). Are there independent lexical and nonlexical routes in word
processing? An evaluation of the dual-route theory of reading. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8, 689–740.
Hung, D. L. , & Tzeng, O. J. L. (1981). Orthographic variations and visual information processing. Psychological
Bulletin, 3, 377–414.
Huntsman, L. A. , & Lima, S. D. (1996). Orthographic neighborhood structure and lexical access. Journal of
Psycholinguistic Research, 25, 417–429.
Huttenlocher, J. (1964). Children’s language: Word–phrase relationship. Science, 143, 264–265.
Hurford, D. P. , Schauf, J. D. , Bunce, L. , Blaich, T. , & Moore, K. (1994). Early identification of children at risk
for reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 371–382.
Hyönä, J. , & Bertram, R. (2004). Do frequency characteristics of nonfixated words influence the processing of
fixated words during reading? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16, 104–127.
Hyönä, J. , Bertram, R. , & Pollatsek, A. (2004). Are long compound words identified serially via their
constituents? Evidence from an eye-movement contingent display change study. Memory & Cognition, 32,
523–532.
Hyönä, J. , & Häikiö, T. (2005). Is emotional content obtained from parafoveal words during reading? An eye
movement analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 46, 475–483.
Hyönä, J. , & Olson, R. K. (1995). Eye fixation patterns among dyslexic and normal readers: Effects of word
length and word frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(6),
1430–1440.
Hyönä, J. & Pollatsek, A. (1998). Reading Finnish compound words: Eye fixations are affected by component
morphemes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1612–1627.
Ikeda, M. , & Saida, S. (1978). Span of recognition in reading. Vision Research, 18, 83–88.
Inhoff, A. W. (1982). Parafoveal word perception: A further case against semantic pre-processing. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 137–145.
Inhoff, A. W. (1987). Lexical access during eye fixations in sentence reading: Effects of word structure. In M.
Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance 12. Hove, UK: Erlbaum.
Inhoff, A. W. (1989a). Lexical access during eye fixations in reading: Are word access codes used to integrate
lexical information across interword fixations? Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 444–461.
Inhoff, A. W. (1989b). Parafoveal processing of words and saccade computation during eye fixations in reading.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 544–555.
Inhoff, A. W. , Connine, C. , Eiter, B. , Radach, R. , & Heller, D. (2004). Phonological representation of words in
working memory during sentence reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 320–325.
Inhoff, A. W. , Connine, C. , & Radach, R. (2002). A contingent speech technique in eye movement research on
reading. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 3, 471–480.
Inhoff, A. W. , & Liu, W. (1998). The perceptual span and oculomotor activity during the reading of Chinese
sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 20–34.
Inhoff, A. W. , & Rayner, K. (1980). Parafoveal word perception: A case against semantic preprocessing.
Perception & Psychophysics, 27, 457–464.
Inhoff, A. W. , & Rayner, K. (1986). Parafoveal word processing during eye fixations in reading: Effects of word
frequency. Perception & Psychophysics, 40, 431–439.
Inhoff, A. W. , Solomon, M. , Radach, R. , & Seymour, B. A. (2011). Temporal dynamics of the eye–voice span
and eye movement control during oral reading. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 23, 543–558.
Inhoff, A. W. , & Topolski, R. (1994). Use of phonological codes during eye fixations in reading and in on-line
and delayed naming tasks. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 689–713.
Ishida, T. , & Ikeda, M. (1989). Temporal properties of information extraction in reading studied by a textmask
replacement technique. Journal of the Optical Society A: Optics and Image Science, 6, 1624–1632.
Iverson, J. A. , & Tunmer, W. E. (1993). Phonological processing skills and the Reading Recovery Program.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 112–125.
Jackendoff, R. (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Jackson, M. D. (1980). Further evidence for a relationship between memory access and reading ability. Journal
of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 683–694.
Jackson, M. D. , & McClelland, J. L. (1975). Sensory and cognitive determinants of reading speed. Journal of
Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 565–574.
Jackson, M. D. , & McClelland, J. L. (1979). Processing determinants of reading speed. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: General, 108, 151–181.
Jared, D. , Levy, B. A. , & Rayner, K. (1999). The role of phonology in the activation of word meanings during
reading: Evidence from proofreading and eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128,
219–264.
Jarvella, R. J. , & Herman, S. J. (1972). Clause structure of sentences and speech processing. Perception &
Psychophysics, 11, 381–384.
Jeffrey, W. E. , & Samuels, S. J. (1967). The effect of method of reading training on initial reading and transfer.
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 6, 354–358.
Joanisse, M. F. , Manis, F. R. , Keating, P. , & Seidenberg, M. S. (2000). Language deficits in dyslexic children:
Speech perception, phonology, and morphology. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 77(1), 30–60.
Job, R. , Peressotti, F. , & Mulatti, C. (2006). The acquisition of literacy in Italian. In R. M. Joshi & P. G. Aaron
(Eds.), Handbook of orthography and literacy (pp. 321–338). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Johnson, D. , & Myklebust, H. (1967). Learning disabilities: Educational principles and practices. New York:
Grune & Stratton.
Johnson, M. K. , Bransford, J. D. , & Soloman, S. K. (1973). Memory for tacit implications of sentences. Journal
of Experimental Psychology, 98, 203–215.
Johnson, N. E. , & Pugh, K. R. (1994). A cohort model of visual word recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 26,
240–346.
Johnson, R. L. (2009). The quite clam is calm: Transposed-letter neighborhood effects on eye movements
during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 943–969.
Johnson, R. L. , Perea, M. , & Rayner, K. (2007). Transposed letter effects in reading: Evidence from eye
movements and parafoveal preview benefit. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Performance and
Perception, 33 , 209–229.
Johnson, R. L. , & Rayner, K. (2007). Top-down and bottom-up effects in pure alexia: Evidence from eye
movements. Neuropsychologia, 45, 2246–2257.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Johnston, J. C. (1978). A test of the sophisticated guessing theory of word perception. Cognitive Psychology,
10, 123–153
Johnston, J. C. , & McClelland, J. L. (1974). Perception of letters in words: Seek and ye shall not find. Science,
184 , 1192–1193.
Jorm, A. F. , & Share, D. L. (1983). Phonological recoding and reading acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 4,
103–147.
Joseph, H. S. , Liversedge, S. P. , Blythe, H. I. , White, S. J. , & Rayner, K. (2009). Word length and landing
position effects during reading in children and adults. Vision Research, 49(16), 2078–2086.
Joshi, R. M. , Binks, E. , Hougen, M. , Dahlgren, M. E. , Ocker-Dean, E. , & Smith, D. L. (2009). Why
elementary teachers might be inadequately prepared to teach reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(5),
392–402.
Juel, C. , Griffith, P. L. , & Gough, P. B. (1986). Acquisition of literacy: A longitudinal study of children in first
and second grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 243–255.
Juhasz, B. J. (2007). The influence of semantic transparency on eye movements during English compound
word recognition. In R. van Gompel , M. Fischer , W. Murray , & R. Hill (Eds.), Eye movements: A window on
mind and brain (pp. 373–389). New York: Elsevier.
Juhasz, B. J. , Liversedge, S. P. , White, S. J. , & Rayner, K. (2006). Binocular coordination of the eyes during
reading: Word frequency and case alternation affect fixation duration but not fixation disparity. Quarterly Journal
of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1614–1625.
Juhasz, B. J. , Pollatsek, A. , Hyönä, J. , & Rayner, K. (2009). Parafoveal processing within and between words.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1356–1376.
Juhasz, B. J. , & Rayner, K. (2003). Investigating the effects of a set of intercorrelated variables on eye-fixation
durations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 1312–1318.
Juhasz, B. J. , & Rayner, K. (2006). The role of age-of-acquisition and word frequency in reading: Evidence
from eye fixation durations. Visual Cognition, 13, 846–863.
Juhasz, B. J. , Starr, M. , Inhoff, A. W. , & Placke, L. (2003). The effects of morphology on the processing of
compound words: Evidence from naming, lexical decisions, and eye fixations. British Journal of Psychology, 94
, 223–244.
Juhasz, B. J. , White, S. J. , Liversedge, S. P. , & Rayner, K. (2008). Eye movements and the use of parafoveal
word length information in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Peformance,
34, 1560–1579.
Juola, J. F. , Schadler, M. , Chabot, R. J. , & McCaughey, M. W. (1978). The development of visual information
processing skills related to reading. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 25, 459–476.
Jurafsky, D. (1996). A probabilistic model of lexical and syntactic access and disambiguation. Cognitive
Science, 20 , 137–194.
Jusczyk, P. W. , Pisoni, D. B. , & Mullennix, J. (1992). Some consequences of stimulus variability on speech
processing by 2-month-old infants. Cognition, 43(3), 253–291.
Just, M. A. , & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension.
Psychological Review, 87, 329–354.
Just, M. A. , & Carpenter, P. A. (1987). The psychology of reading and language comprehension. Newton, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
Just, M. A. , Carpenter, P. A. , & Masson, M. E. J. (1982). What eye fixations tell us about speed reading and
skimming. Eye-Lab Technical Report, Carnegie-Mellon University.
Justice, L. M. , Pullen, P. C. , & Pence, K. (2008). Influence of verbal and nonverbal references to print on
preschoolers’ visual attention to print during storybook reading. Developmental Psychology, 44, 855–866.
Justice, L. M. , Skibbe, L. , Canning, A. , & Lankford, C. (2005). Preschoolers, print, and storybooks: An
observational study using eye-gaze analysis. Journal of Research in Reading, 28, 229–243.
Kail, R. , & Hall, L. K. (1994). Processing speed, naming speed, and reading. Developmental Psychology, 30,
949–954.
Kail, R. , Hall, L. , & Caskey, B. (1999). Processing speed, exposure to print, and naming speed. Applied
Psycholinguistics, 20, 303–314.
Kambe, G. (2004). Parafoveal processing of prefixed words during eye fixations in reading: Evidence against
morphological influences on parafoveal preprocessing. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 279–292.
Kameenui, E. J. , Carnine, D. W. , & Freschi, R. (1982). Effects of text construction and instructional procedures
for teaching word meanings on comprehension and recall. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 367–388.
Kanner, L. (1943). Autistic disturbances of affective contact. Nervous Child, 2, 217–250.
Karlin, M. B. , & Bower, G. H. (1976). Semantic category effects in visual word search. Perception &
Psychophysics, 19 , 417–424.
Katz, L. , & Feldman, L. B. (1983). Relation between pronunciation and recognition of printed words in deep
and shallow orthographies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 157–166.
Katz, L. , & Frost, R. (1992). Reading in different orthographies: The orthographic depth hypothesis. In R. Frost
& L. Katz (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology, and meaning (pp. 67–84). Amsterdam: Elsevier North-
Holland Press.
Katz, R. B. (1986). Phonological deficiencies in children with reading disability: Evidence from an object-naming
task. Cognition, 22(3), 225–257.
Katz, R. B. , Shankweiler, D. , & Liberman, I. Y. (1981). Memory for item order and phonetic recoding in the
beginning reader. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 32, 474–484.
Katzir, T. , Kim, Y. , Wolf , M. , Kennedy, B. , Lovett, M. , & Morris, R. (2006). The relationship of spelling
recognition, RAN, and phonological awareness to reading skills in older poor readers and younger
readingmatched controls. Reading and Writing, 19(8), 845–872.
Katzir, T. , Kim, Y. , Wolf , M. , Morris, R. , & Lovett, M. W. (2008). The varieties of pathways to dysfluent
reading: Comparing subtypes of children with dyslexia at letter, word, and connected text levels of reading.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(1), 47–66.
Keele, S. W. (1972). Attention demands of memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 93, 245–248.
Keenan, J. M. , & Brown, P. (1984). Children’s reading rate and retention as a function of the number of
propositions in a text. Child Development, 55, 1556–1569.
Keenan, J. M. , & Kintsch, W. (1974). The identification of explicitly and implicitly presented information. In W.
Kintsch (Ed.), The representation of meaning in memory (pp. 153–165). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Inc.
Kennedy, A. (1999). Parafoveal-on-foveal effects in reading and word recognition. In W. Becker , H. Deubel , &
T. Mergner (Eds.), Current oculomotor research: Physiological and psychological aspects (pp. 359–367). New
York : Plenum.
Kennedy, A. , & Murray, W. S. (1984). Inspection times for words in syntactically ambiguous sentences under
three presentation conditions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10,
833–849.
Kennison, S. M. (2001). Limitations on the use of verb information during sentence comprehension.
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 132–137.
Kennison, S. M. (2004). The effect of phonemic repetition on syntactic ambiguity resolution: Implications for
models of working memory. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 33, 493–516.
Kennison, S. M. , & Clifton, C. Jr. (1995). Determinants of parafoveal preview benefit in high and low working
memory capacity readers: Implications for eye movement control. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 68–81.
Kennison, S. M. , Sieck, J. P. , & Briesch, K. A. (2003). Evidence for a late-occurring effect of phoneme
repetition in silent reading. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32, 297–312.
Kertesz, A. , Harlock, W. , & Coates, R. (1979). Computer tomographic localization, lesion size, and prognosis
in aphasia and nonverbal impairment. Brain and Language, 8(1), 34–50.
Kessler, B. (2009). Statistical learning of conditional orthographic correspondences. Writing Systems Research,
1 (1), 19–34.
Kessler, B. , & Treiman, R. (2001). Relationship between sounds and letters in english monosyllables. Journal
of Memory and Language, 44, 592–617.
Kessler, B. , & Treiman, R. (2003). Is English spelling chaotic? Misconceptions concerning its irregularity.
Reading Psychology, 24(3–4), 267–289.
Kimball, J. (1973). Seven principles of surface structure parsing in natural language, Cognition, 2, 15–47.
Kintsch, W. (1974). The representation of meaning in memory. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The use of knowledge in discourse processing. Psychological Review, 95, 163–182.
Kintsch, W. (1994). Text comprehension, memory, and learning. American Psychologist, 49, 294–303.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Kintsch, W. , & Keenan, J. (1973). Reading rate and retention as a function of the number of propositions in the
base structure of sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 257–274.
Kintsch, W. , Kozminsky, E. , Streby, W. J. , McKoon, G. , & Keenan, J. M. (1975). Comprehension and recall of
test as a function of content variables. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 196–214.
Kintsch, W. , & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological
Review, 85, 363–394.
Kintsch, W. , & Vipond, D. (1979). Reading comprehension and readability in educational practice and
psychological theory. In L-G. Nilsson (ed.), Perspectives on memory research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Inc.
Kirkby, J. A. , Blythe, H. I. , Drieghe, D. , & Liversedge, S. P. Reading text increases binocular disparity in
children. Submitted to PL oS One.
Kirkby, J. A. , Webster, L. A. , Blythe, H. I. , & Liversedge, S. P. (2008). Binocular coordination during reading
and non–reading tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 742–763.
Kleiman, G. M. (1975). Speech recoding in reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14,
323–339.
Kliegl, R. (2007). Toward a perceptual–span theory of distributed processing in reading: A reply to Rayner,
Pollatsek, Drieghe, Slattery, and Reichle (2007). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 530–537.
Kliegl, R. , Nuthmann, A. , & Engbert, R. (2006). Tracking the mind during reading: The influence of past,
present, and future words on fixation durations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 12–35.
Kliegl, R. , Olson, R. K. , & Davidson, B. J. (1982). Regression analyses as a tool for studying reading
processes: Comments on Just and Carpenter’s eye fixation theory. Memory & Cognition, 10, 287–296.
Kliegl, R. , Risse, S. , & Laubrock, J. (2007). Preview benefit and parafoveal-on-foveal effects from word n+2.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1250–1255.
Knecht, S. , Deppe, M. , Drager, B. , Bobe, L. , Lohmann, H. , Ringelstein, E. , et al. (2000). Language
lateralization in healthy right-handers. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 123(1), 74–81.
Koenig, J-P. , Mauner, G. , & Bienvenue, B. (2003). Arguments for adjuncts. Cognition, 89, 67–103.
Koh, S. , Sanford, A. , Clifton, C. Jr. , & Dawydiak, E. J. (2008). Good-enough representation in plural and
singular pronominal reference: Modulating the conjunction cost. In J. Gundel & N. Hedberg (Eds.), Reference:
Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 123–142). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Kolers, P. (1972). Experiments in reading. Scientific American, 227, 84–91.
Koornneef, A. W. , & van Berkum, J. J. A. (2006). On the use of verb-based implicit causality in sentence
comprehension: Evidence from self-paced reading and eye tracking. Journal of Memory and Language, 54,
445–465.
Koppen, M. , Noordman, L. G. M. , & Vonk, W. (2008). World knowledge in computational models of discourse
comprehension. Discourse Processes, 45, 429–463.
Kosslyn, S. M. , & Matt, A. M. (1977). If you speak slowly, do people read your prose slowly? Person-particular
speech recoding during reading. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 9, 250–252.
Kowler, E. , & Martins, A. J. (1982). Eye movements of preschool children. Science, 215, 997–999.
Kronbichler, M. , Hutzler, F. , & Wimmer, H. (2002). Dyslexia:Verbal impairments in the absence of
magnocellular impairments. Neuroreport, 13(5), 617–620.
Kuhn, M. R. , & Stahl, S. A. (2003). Fluency: A review of developmental and remedial practices. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 95, 3–21.
Kuperman, V. , Schreuder, R. , Bertram, R. , & Baayen, R. H. (2009). Reading polymorphemic Dutch
compounds: Toward a multiple route model of lexical processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception and Performance, 35(3), 876–895.
Kuperman, V. , & Van Dyke, J. A. (2011). Effects of individual differences in verbal skills on eye-movement
patterns during sentence reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 42–73.
Kurby, C. A. , Magliano, J. P. , & Rapp, D. N. (2009). Those voices in your head: Activation of auditory images
during reading. Cognition, 112, 457–461.
Kussmaul, A. (1877). Word deafness and word blindness. In H. von Ziemssen & J. A. T. McCreery (Eds.),
Cyclopedia of the practice of medicine (pp. 770–778). New York: William Wood.
Kutas, M. , & Federmeier, K. (2007). Event–related brain potential (ERP) studies of sentence processing. In M.
G. Gaskell (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 385–406). Oxford, UK: Oxford University
Press.
Kutas, M. , & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity.
Science, 207, 203–205.
Kutas, M. , Van Petten, C. , & Kluender, R. (2006). Psycholinguistics electrified II (1994–2005). In M. A.
Gernsbacher & M. Traxler (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics ( 2nd ed., pp. 655–720). New York: Elsevier.
LaBerge, D. (1972). Beyond auditory coding. In J. F. Kavanagh & I. G. Mattingly (Eds.), Language by ear and
by eye. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
LaBerge D. , & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading.
Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323.
Landerl, K. (2000). Influences of orthographic consistency and reading instruction on the development of
nonword reading skills. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 15, 239–257.
Landerl, K. , & Wimmer, H. (2008). Development of word reading fluency and spelling in a consistent
orthography: An 8-year follow-up. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 150–161.
Landi, N. , & Perfetti, C. A. (2007). An electrophysiological investigation of semantic and phonological
processing in skilled and less skilled comprehenders. Brain and Language, 102, 30–45.
Lassonde, K. A. , & O'Brien, E. J. (2009). Contextual specification in the activation of predictive inferences.
Discourse Processes, 46, 426–438.
Laubrock, J. , Hohenstein, S. , & Kliegl, R. (2010). Semantic preview benefit in eye movements during reading:
A parafoveal fast-priming study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36,
1150–1170.
Laubrock, J. , & Kliegl, R. (2011). The eye–voice span in oral reading. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Laubrock, J. , Kliegl, R. , & Engbert, R. (2006). SWIFT explorations of age differences in eye movements during
reading. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 30, 872–884.
Leach, J. M. , Scarborough, H. S. , & Rescorla, L. (2003). Late-emerging reading disabilities. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 95(2), 211–224.
Lean, D. S. , & Arbuckle, T. Y. (1984). Phonological coding in prereaders. Journal of Educational Psychology,
76, 1282–1290
Lee, H. , Rayner, K. , & Pollatsek, A. (1999). The time course of phonological, semantic, and orthographic
coding in reading: Evidence from the fast priming technique. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 624–634.
Lee, Y. , Binder, K. S. , Kim, J. , Pollatsek, A. , & Rayner, K. (1999). Activation of phonological codes during eye
fixations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25(4), 948–964.
Lemhöfer, K. , Dijkstra, T. , Schriefers, H. , Baayen, R. H. , Grainger, J. , & Zwitserlood, P. (2008). Native
language influences on word recognition in a second language: A megastudy. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(1), 12–31.
Lenneberg, E. H. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.
Leonard, C. M. , Eckert, M. A. , Lombardino, L. J. , Oakland, T. , Kranzler, J. , Mohr, C. M. , et al. (2001).
Anatomical risk factors for phonological dyslexia. Cerebral Cortex, 11(2), 148–157.
Lervåg, A. , & Hulme, C. (2009). Rapid automatized naming (RAN) taps a mechanism that places constraints
on the development of early reading fluency. Psychological Science, 20(8), 1040–1048.
Lesch, M. F. , & Pollatsek, A. (1998). Evidence for the use of assembled phonology in accessing the meaning
of printed words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 24, 573–592.
Lesgold, A. M. , & Curtis, M. E. (1981). Learning to read words efficiently. In A. M. Lesgold & C. A. Perfetti
(Eds.), Interactive processes in reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Lesgold, A. M. , & Resnick, L. B. (1982). How reading disabilities develop: Perspectives from a longitudinal
study. In J. P. Das , R. Mulcahy , & A. E. Wall (Eds.), Theory and research in learning disability. New York:
Plenum.
Levin, B. , & Rappaport Hovav, M. (1996). Lexical semantics and syntactic structure. In S. Lappin (Ed.), The
handbook of contemporary semantic theory (pp. 487–508). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Levin, H. , & Kaplan, E. L. (1970). Grammatical structure and reading. In H. Levin & J. P. Williams (Eds.), Basic
studies on reading. New York: Basic Books.
Levy, B. A. (1975).Vocalization and suppression effects in sentence memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and
Verbal Behavior, 14, 304–316.
Levy, B. A. (1977). Reading: Speech and meaning processes. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,
16, 623–638.
Levy, B. A. (1978). Speech analysis during sentence processing: Reading and listening. Visible Language, 12,
81–101.
Levy, B. A. (1981). Interactive processes during reading. In A. M. Lesgold & C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Interactive
processes in reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Levy, B. A. , Gong, Z. , Hessels, S. , Evans, M. A. , & Jared, D. (2006). Understanding print: Early reading
development and the contributions of home literacy experiences. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 95,
78.
Levy, R. (2008). Expectation-based syntactic comprehension. Cognition, 106, 1126–1177.
Levy, R. , Bicknell, K. , Slattery, T. J. , & Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movement evidence that readers maintain and
act on uncertainty about past linguistic input. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106,
21086–21090.
Lewis, R. L. , & Vasishth, S. (2005). An activation-based model of sentence processing as skilled memory
retrieval. Cognitive Science, 29, 375–420.
Lewkowicz, N. K. (1980). Phonemic awareness training: What to teach and how to teach it. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 72, 686–700.
Leybaert, J. , & Alegria, J. (1993). Is word processing involuntary in deaf children? British Journal of
Developmental Psychology, 11, 1–29.
Li, X. , Liu, P. , & Rayner, K. (2011). Eye movement guidance in Chinese reading: Is there a preferred viewing
location? Vision Research, 51, 1146–1156.
Libben, G. (2003). Morphological parsing and morphological structure. In A. Egbert & D. Sandra (Eds.),
Reading complex words (pp. 221–239). Amsterdam: Kluwer.
Liberman, A. M. , Cooper, F. S. , Shankweiler, D. P. , & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967). Perception of the speech
code. Psychological Review, 74, 431–461.
Liberman, I. Y. (1973). Segmentation of the spoken word and reading acquisition. Bulletin of the Orton Society,
23 , 65–77.
Liberman, I. Y. , Liberman, A. , Mattingly, I. , & Shankweiler, P. (1980). Orthography and the beginning reader.
In J. Kavenagh & R. Venezky (eds.), Orthography reading and dyslexia. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Liberman, I. Y. , & Shankweiler, D. (1979). Speech, the alphabet, and teaching to read. In L. Resnick & P.
Weaver , (Eds.), Theory and practice of early reading (Vol. 2). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Liberman, I. Y. , & Shankweiler, D. (1991). Phonology and beginning reading: A tutorial. In L. Rieben & C. A.
Perfetti (Eds.), Learning to read: Basic research and its implications (pp. 3–17). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Liberman, I. Y. , Shankweiler, D. , Fischer, F. W. , & Carter, B. (1974). Explicit syllable and phoneme
segmentation in the young child. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 18, 201–212.
Liberman, I. Y. , Shankweiler, D. , Liberman, A. M. , Fowler, C. , & Fischer, F. W. (1977). Phonetic
segmentation and recoding in the beginning reader. In A. S. Reber & D. Scarborough (Eds.), Towards a
psychology of reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Liberman, I. Y. , Shankweiler, D. , Orlando, C. , Harris, K. S. , & Berti, F. B. (1971). Letter confusion and
reversals of sequence in the beginning reader: Implications for Orton’s theory of developmental dyslexia.
Cortex, 7, 127–142.
Liddle, W. (1965). An investigation of the Wood Reading Dynamics method. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms,
No. 60-5559;.
Lima, S. D. (1987). Morphological analysis in sentence reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 84–99.
Lima, S. D. , & Inhoff, A. W. (1985). Lexical access during eye fixations in reading: Effects of word-initial letter
sequence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 272–285.
Lima, S. D. , & Pollatsek, A. (1983). Lexical access via an orthographic code? The Basic Orthographic Syllable
Structure (BOSS) reconsidered. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 310–332.
Lin, D. , McBride-Chang, C. , Shu, H. , Zhang, Y. , Li, H. , Zhang, J. , et al. (2010). Small wins big: Analytic
pinyin skills promote Chinese word reading. Psychological Science, 21, 1117–1122.
Lindamood, P. , & Lindamood, P. (1998). The Lindamood phoneme sequencing program for reading, spelling,
and speech (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Liu, W. , Inhoff, A. W. , Ye, Y. , & Wu, C. (2002). Use of parafoveally visible characters during the reading of
Chinese sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 1213–1227.
Liversedge, S. P. , Paterson, K. B. , & Clayes, E. L. (2002). The influence of only on syntactic processing of
‘long’ relative clause sentences. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55A, 225–240.
Liversedge, S. P. , Pickering, M. J. , Branigan, H. , & van Gompel, R. P. G. (1998). Processing arguments and
adjuncts in isolation and context: The case of by-phrase ambiguities in passives. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24(2), 461–475.
Liversedge, S. P. , Rayner, K. , White, S. J. , Findlay, J. M. , & McSorley, E. (2006). Binocular coordination of
the eyes during reading. Current Biology, 16, 1726–1729.
Liversedge, S. P. , Rayner, K. , White, S. J. , Vergilino-Perez, D. , Findlay, J. M. , & Kentridge, R. W. (2004).
Eye movements while reading disappearing text: Is there a gap effect in reading? Vision Research, 44,
1013–1024.
Liversedge, S. P. , White, S. J. , Findlay, J. M. , & Rayner, K. (2006). Binocular coordination of eye movements
during reading. Vision Research, 46, 2363–2374.
Livingstone, M. , Rosen, G. , Drislane, F. , & Galaburda, A. (1991). Physiological and anatomical evidence for a
magnocellular deficit in developmental dyslexia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 88,
7943–7947.
Llewellyn-Thomas, E. (1962). Eye movements in speed reading. In R. G. Stauffer (Ed.), Speed reading:
Practices and procedures. Newark, DE: University of Delaware Reading Center.
Locke, J. L. (1971). Phonemic processing in silent reading. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 32, 905–906.
Locke, J. L. (1978). Phonemic effects in the silent reading of hearing and deaf children. Cognition, 6, 173–187.
Locke, J. L. , Hodgson, J. , Macaruso, P. , Roberts, J. , Lambrecht-Smith, S. , & Guttentag, C. (1997). The
development of developmental dyslexia. In C. Hulme & M. Snowling (Eds.), Dyslexia: Biology, cognition and
intervention (pp. 72–96). London: Whurr.
Loftus, G. R. (1983). Eye fixations on text and scenes. In K. Rayner (Ed.), Eye movements in reading:
Perceptual and language processes. New York: Academic Press.
Loftus, G. R. , & Mackworth, N. H. (1978). Cognitive determinants of fixation location during picture viewing.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4, 565–572.
Lonigan, C. J. , Burgess, S. R. , & Anthony, J. L. (2000). Development of emergent literacy and early reading
skills in preschool children: Evidence from a latent-variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 36 ,
596–613.
Lonigan, C. J. , Burgess, S. R. , Anthony, J. L. , & Barker, T. A. (1998). Development of phonological sensitivity
in 2- to 5-year-old children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 294–311.
Lovegrove, W. J. , Bowling, A. , Badcock, D. , & Blackwood, M. (1980). Specific reading disability: Differences
in contrast sensitivity as a function of spatial frequency. Science, 210(4468), 439–440.
Lovett, M. W. (1984). The search for subtypes of specific reading disability: Reflections from a cognitive
perspective. Annals of Dyslexia, 34, 155–178.
Lukatela, G. , Popadic, D. , Ognjenovic, P. , & Turvey, M. T. (1980). Lexical decision in a phonologically shallow
orthography. Memory & Cognition, 8, 124–132.
Lukatela, G. , Savic, M. , Gligorijevic, B. , Ognjenovic, P. , & Turvey, M. T. (1978). Bi-alphabetical lexical
decision. Language and Speech, 21, 142–165.
Lundberg, I. , Olofsson, A. , & Wall, S. (1980). Reading and spelling skills in the first school years predicted
from phonemic awareness skills in kindergarten. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 21, 159–173.
Lupker, S. J. , Perea, M. , & Davis, C. J. (2008). Transposed letter priming effects: Consonants, vowels and
letter frequency. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 93–116.
Luttenberg, J. (1965). Contribution to the fetal ontogenesis of the corpus callosum in man. II. Folio
Morphologica, 13 , 136–144.
Lyle, J. G. (1979). Reading retardation and reversal tendency: A factorial study. Child Development, 40,
832–843.
Lyle, J. G. , & Goyen, J. (1968). Visual recognition, developmental lag, and strephosymbolia in reading
retardation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 73, 25–29.
Lyon, G. R. , Fletcher, J. M. , Shaywitz, S. E. , Shaywitz, B. A. , Torgesen, J. K. , Wood, F. B. , et al. (2001).
Rethinking learning disabilities. In C. E. Finn , A. J. Rotherham , & C. R. Hokanson (Eds.), Rethinking special
education for a new century. Washington, DC: Fordham Foundation.
Lyon, G. R. , Shaywitz, S. E. , & Shaywitz, B. A. (2003). A definition of dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 53, 1–14.
MacDonald, M. C. , Pearlmutter, N. J. , & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity
resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676–703.
MacDonald, M. C. , & Seidenberg, M. S. (2006). Constraint satisfaction accounts of lexical and sentence
comprehension. In M. J. Traxler & M. A. Gernsbacher (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics ( 2nd ed., pp.
581–611). London: Academic Press.
Mackworth, J. F. (1972). Some models of the reading process: Learners and skilled readers. Reading Research
Quarterly, 7, 701–733.
Mackworth, N. H. (1965).Visual noise causes tunnel vision. Psychonomic Science, 3, 67–68.
Mackworth, N. H. , & Morandi, A. J. (1967). The gaze selects informative details within pictures. Perception &
Psychophysics, 2, 547–552.
MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological
Bulletin, 109, 163–203.
MacWhinney, B. , & Bates, E. (Eds). (1990). The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Mandler, J. M. (1986). On the comprehension of temporal order. Language and Cognitive Processes, 1,
309–320.
Manis, F. R. , & Keating, P. (2005). Speech perception in dyslexic children with and without language
impairments. In H. W. Catts & A. G. Kamhi (Eds.), The connections between language and reading disabilities
(pp. 77–99). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Manis, F. R. , Seidenberg, M. S. , Doi, L. M. , & McBride-Chang, C. (1996). On the bases of two subtypes of
development dyslexia. Cognition, 58(2), 157–195.
Mann, V. A. , Liberman, I. Y. , & Shankweiler, D. (1980). Children’s memory for sentences and word strings in
relation to reading ability. Memory & Cognition, 8, 329–335.
Mannhaupt, G. , Jansen, H. , & Marx, H. (1997). Cultural influences on literacy development. In C. K. Leong &
R. M. Joshi (Eds.), Cross-language studies of learning to read and spell: Phonologic and orthographic
processing (pp. 161–174). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Marcel, A. J. (1978). Unconscious reading: Experiments on people who do not know they are reading. Visible
Language, 12, 391–404.
Marcel, A. J. (1983). Conscious and unconscious perception: Experiments on visual masking. Cognitive
Psychology, 15, 197–237.
Marcel, T. (1974). The effective visual field and the use of context in fast and slow readers of two ages. British
Journal of Psychology, 65, 479–492.
Marchbanks, G. , & Levin, H. (1965). Cues by which children recognize words. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 56 , 57–61.
Margolin, C. M. , Griebel, B. , & Wolford, G. (1982). Effect of distraction on reading versus listening. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 8, 613–618.
Mark, L. S. , Shankweiler, D. , Liberman, I. Y. , & Fowler, C. A. (1977). Phonetic recoding and reading difficulty
in beginning readers. Memory & Cognition, 5, 623–629.
Markman, E. M. (1979). Realizing that you don’t understand: Elementary school children’s awareness of
inconsistencies. Child Development, 50, 643–655.
Markman, E. M. (1981). Conprehension monitoring. In W. P. Dickson (Ed.), Children’s oral communication
skills. New York: Academic Press.
Marks, C. B. , Doctorow, M. J. , & Wittrock, M. C. (1974). Word frequency and reading comprehension. Journal
of Education Research, 67, 259–262.
Marsh, G. , Friedman, M. , Welch, V. , & Desberg, P. (1981). A cognitive–developmental approach to reading
acquisition. In T. G. Waller & G. E. MacKinnon , (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice,
Vol. 3. New York: Academic Press.
Marshall, C. M. , Snowling, M. J. , & Bailey, P. J. (2001). Rapid auditory processing and phonological ability in
normal readers and readers with dyslexia. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44(4),
925–940.
Marshall, J. C. , & Newcombe, F. (1966). Syntactic and semantic errors in paralexia. Neuropsychologia, 4,
169–176.
Marshall, J. C. , & Newcombe, F. (1973). Patterns of paralexia: A psycholinguistic approach. Journal of
Psycholinguistic Research, 2, 175–200.
Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1973). Linguistic structure and speech shadowing at very short latencies. Nature, 244,
522–523.
Marslen-Wilson, W. D. , & Tyler, L. K. (1987). Against modularity. In J. Garfield (Ed.), Modularity in knowledge
representation and natural language understanding. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Martin, A. , & McElree, B. (2008). A content-addressable pointer mechanism underlies comprehension of verb
phrase ellipsis. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 879–906.
Martin, M. (1978). Speech recoding in silent reading. Memory & Cognition, 6, 108–114.
Martin, S. E. (1972). Nonalphabetic writing systems: Some observations. In J. F. Kavanagh & I. G. Mattingly
(Eds.), Language by ear and by eye. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mason, J. M. (1980). When do children begin to read: An exploration of four year old children’s letter and word
reading competencies. Reading Research Quarterly, 15, 203–227.
Masonheimer, P. E. , Drum, P. A. , & Ehri, L. C. (1984). Does environmental print identification lead children
into word reading? Journal of Reading Behavior, 16(4), 257–271.
Massaro, D. W. (1975). Understanding language: An information-processing analysis of speech perception,
reading, and psycholinguistics. New York: Academic Press.
Masserang, K. M. , Pollatsek, A. , & Rayner, K. (2009). No morphological decomposition with parafoveal
previews. Presented at ECEM 15, 23.8–27.8, Southampton, UK.
Masson, M. E. J. , & Isaak, M. I. (1999). Masked priming of words and nonwords in a naming task: Further
evidence for a nonlexical basis for priming. Memory & Cognition, 27, 399–412.
Masson, M. E. J. , & Miller, J. (1983). Working memory and individual differences in comprehension and
memory of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 314–318.
Matin, E. (1974). Saccadic suppression: A review and an analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 899–917.
Mattingly, I. G. (1972). Reading, the linguistic process, and linguistic awareness. In J. F. Kavanaugh & I. G.
Mattingly (Eds.), Language by ear and by eye: The relationship between speech and reading. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
Mayberry, R. (2007). When timing is everything: Age of first-language acquisition effects on second-language
learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 537–549.
Mayberry, R. I. , Chamberlain, C. , Waters, G. , & Hwang, P. (2005). Word recognition in children who are deaf
and sign. Poster presented at the Society for Research in Child Development, Atlanta.
Mayer, P. , Crowley, K. , & Kaminska, Z. (2007). Reading and spelling processes in Welsh–English bilinguals:
Differential effects of concurrent vocalisation tasks. Reading and Writing, 20(7), 671–690.
McBride-Chang, C. (1996). Models of speech perception and phonological processing in reading. Child
Development, 67(4), 1836–1856.
McBride-Chang, C. , & Kail, R. V. (2002). Cross-cultural similarities in the predictors of reading acquisition.
Child Development, 73(5), 1392–1407.
McCardle, P. , & Chhabra, V. (2004). The voice of evidence in reading research. Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes.
McCaughey, M. , Juola, J. , Schadler, M. , & Ward, N. (1980). Whole-word units are used before orthographic
knowledge in perceptual development. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 30, 411–421.
McClelland, J. L. (1986). The programmable blackboard model of reading. In J. L. McClelland , D. E. Rumelhart
, & the PDP research group (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of
cognition. Vol. II. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books.
McClelland, J. L. , & O'Regan, J. K. (1981). Expectations increase the benefit derived from parafoveal visual
information in reading words aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,
7, 634–644.
McClelland, J. L. , & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter
perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375–407.
McClelland, J. L. , & Rumelhart, D. E. (Eds.). (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the
microstructure of cognition (Vol. 2). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
McConkie, G. W. , & Hogaboam, T. W. (1985). Eye position and word identification in reading. In R. Groner , G.
W. McConkie , & C. Menz (Eds.), Eye movements and human information processing. Amsterdam: North-
Holland Press.
McConkie, G. W. , Kerr, P. W. , Reddix, M. D. , & Zola, D. (1988). Eye movement control during reading: I. The
location of initial eye fixations in words. Vision Research, 28, 1107–1118.
McConkie, G. W. , & Rayner, K. (1975). The span of the effective stimulus during a fixation in reading.
Perception & Psychophysics, 17, 578–586.
McConkie, G. W. , & Rayner, K. (1976a). Asymmetry of the perceptual span in reading. Bulletin of the
Psychonomic Society, 8, 365–368.
McConkie, G. W. , & Rayner, K. (1976b). Identifying the span of the effective stimulus in reading: Literature
review and theories of reading. In H. Singer & R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes in
reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
McConkie, G. W. , Rayner, K. , & Wilson, S. J. (1973). Experimental manipulation of reading strategies. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 65, 1–8.
McConkie, G. W. , Underwood, N. R. , Zola, D. , & Wolverton, G. S. (1985). Some temporal characteristics of
processing during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11,
168–186.
McConkie, G. W. , & Zola, D. (1979). Is visual information integrated across successive fixations in reading?
Perception & Psychophysics, 25, 221–224.
McConkie, G. W. , & Zola, D. (1981). Language constraints and the functional stimulus in reading. In A. M.
Lesgold & C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Interactive process in reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
McConkie, G. W. , & Zola, D. (1984). Eye movement control during reading: The effects of word units. In W.
Prinz & A. F. Sanders (Eds.), Cognition and motor processes. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
McConkie, G. W. , Zola, D. , Grimes, J. , Kerr, P. W. , Bryant, R. B. , & Wolff, P. M. (1991). Children’s eye
movements during reading. In J. F. Stein (Ed.), Vision and visual dyslexia (pp 251–262). Oxford: Macmillan.
McConkie, G. W. , Zola, D. , & Wolverton, G. S. (1980). How precise is eye guidance? Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA, April.
McCusker, L. X. , Bias, R. G. , & Hillinger, M. L. (1981). Phonological recoding and reading. Psychological
Bulletin, 89, 217–245.
McCutchen, D. , & Berninger, V. W. (1999). Those who know, teach well: Helping teachers master literacy-
related subject-matter knowledge. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, [Special Issue, Moving from
research to practice: Professional development to promote effective teaching of early reading], 14(4), 215–226.
McCutchen, D. , & Perfetti, C. A. (1982). The visual tongue-twister effect: Phonological activation in silent
reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 672–687.
McDonald, S. A. (2006). Parafoveal preview benefit in reading is only obtained from the saccade goal. Vision
Research, 46, 4416–4424.
McDonald, S. A. , & Shillcock, R. C. (2003a). Eye movements reveal the on-line computation of lexical
probabilities during reading. Psychological Science, 14, 648–652.
McDonald, S. A. , & Shillcock, R. C. (2003b). Low-level predictive inference in reading: The influence of
transitional probabilities on eye movements. Vision Research, 43, 1735–1751.
McElree, B. , Traxler, M. , Pickering, M. J. , Seely, R. E. , & Jackendoff, R. (2001). Reading time evidence for
enriched composition. Cognition, 78, B17–B25.
McGee, L. M. , Lomax, R. G. , & Head, M. H. (1988). Young children’s written language knowledge: What
environmental and functional print reading reveals. Journal of Reading Behavior, 20(2), 99–118.
McGuigan, F. J. (1967). Feedback of speech muscle activity during silent reading: Two comments. Science,
157, 579–580.
McGuigan, F. J. (1970). Covert oral behavior during the silent performance of language tasks. Psychological
Bulletin, 74, 309–326.
McGuigan, F. J. (1971). External auditory feedback from covert oral behavior during silent reading.
Psychonomic Science, 25, 212–214.
McGuigan, F. J. , & Bailey, S. C. (1969). Longitudinal study of covert oral behavior during silent reading.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 28, 170.
McGuigan, F. J. , Keller, B. , & Stanton, E. (1964). Covert language responses during silent reading. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 55, 339–343.
McGuinness, D. , McGuinness, C. , & Donohue, J. (1995). Phonological training and the alphabet principle:
Evidence for reciprocal causality. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), 830–852.
McGurk, H. , & MacDonald, J. (1976). Hearing eyes and seeing voices. Nature, 264, 746–748.
McKague, M. , Pratt, C. , & Johnston, M. B. (2001). The effect of oral vocabulary on reading visually novel
words: A comparison of the dual-route-cascaded and triangle frameworks. Cognition, 80(3), 231–262.
McKeown, M. G. , Beck, I. L. , Omanson, R. C. , & Perfetti, C. A. (1983). The effects of long-term vocabulary
instruction on reading comprehension: A replication. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(1), 3–18.
McKoon, G. , Gerrig, R. J. , & Greene, S. B. (1996). Pronoun resolution without pronouns: Some consequences
of memory based text processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22,
919–932.
McKoon, G. , & Macfarland, T. (2002). Event templates in the lexical representation of verbs. Cognitive
Psychology, 45, 1–44.
McKoon, G. , & Ratcliff, R. (1980). Priming in item recognition: The organization of propositions in memory for
text. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 369–386.
McKoon, G. , & Ratcliff, R. (1986). Inferences about predictable events. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12, 82–91.
McKoon, G. , & Ratcliff, R. (2003). Meaning through syntax: Language comprehension and the reduced relative
clause construction. Psychological Review, 110, 490–525.
McLaughlin, G. H. (1969). Reading at “impossible” speeds. Journal of Reading, 12, 449–454, 502–510.
McMahon, M. L. (1976). Phonic processing in reading printed words: Effects of phonemic relationships between
words on time. Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
McNamara, D. S. , Louwerse, M. M. , McCarthy, P. M. , & Graesser, A. C. (2010). Coh-Metrix: Capturing
linguistic features of cohesion. Discourse Processes, 47, 292–330.
McRae, K. , Ferretti, T. R. , & Amyote, L. (1997). Thematic roles as verb-specific concepts. Language and
Cognitive Processes, 12, 137–176.
McRae, K. , Spivey-Knowlton, M. J. , & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Modeling the influence of thematic fit (and
other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 283–312.
Mehegan, C. , & Dreifuss, F. (1972). Hyperlexia. Neurology, 22, 1105–1111.
Mehler, J. (1963). Some effects of grammatical transformations on the recall of English sentences. Journal of
Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2, 346–351.
Mehler, J. , Bever, T. G. , & Carey, P. (1967). What we look at when we read. Perception & Psychophysics, 2,
213–218.
Meltzer, H. S. , & Herse, R. (1969). The boundaries of written words as seen by first graders. Journal of
Reading Behavior, 1, 3–14.
Metsala, J. L. , & Wally, A. C. (1998). Spoken vocabulary growth and the segmental restructuring of lexical
representations: Precursors to phonemic awareness and early reading ability. In J. Metsala & L. Ehri (Eds.),
Word recognition in beginning reading (pp. 89–120). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Meyer, B. J. F. (1975). The organization of prose and its effect on recall. Amsterdam: North Holland.
Meyer, D. E. , & Gutschera, K. (1975). Orthographic versus phonemic processing of printed words. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Denver, CO, November.
Meyer, D. E. , & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1971). Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: Evidence of a
dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90, 227–234.
Meyer, D. E. , Schvaneveldt, R. W. , & Ruddy, M. G. (1974). Functions of graphemic and phonemic codes in
visual word-recognition. Memory & Cognition, 2, 309–321.
Meyer, M. S. , & Felton, R. H. (1999). Repeated reading to enhance fluency: Old approaches and new
direction. Annals of Dyslexia, 49, 283–306.
Meyer, M. S. , Wood, F. B. , Hart, L. A. , & Felton, R. H. (1998). Selective predictive value of rapid automatized
naming in poor readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(2), 106–117.
Mezrich, J. J. (1973). The word superiority effect in brief visual displays: Elimination by vocalization. Perception
& Psychophysics, 13, 45–48.
Mickish, V. (1974). Children’s perceptions of written word boundaries. Journal of Reading Behavior, 6, 19–22.
Miellet, S. , O'Donnell, P. J. , & Sereno, S. C. (2009). Parafoveal magnification:Visual acuity does not modulate
the perceptual span in reading. Psychological Science, 20, 721–728.
Miellet, S. , Sparrow, L. , & Sereno, S. C. (2007). Word frequency and predictability effects in reading French:
An evaluation of the E–Z Reader model. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 762–769.
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing
information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–89.
Miller, G. A. (1962). Some psychological studies of grammar. American Psychologist, 17, 748–762.
Milne, E. , Swettenham, J. , Hansen, P. , Campbell, R. , Jeffries, H. , & Plaisted, K. (2002). High motion
coherence thresholds in children with autism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 43(2), 255–263.
Miozzo, M. , & Caramazza, A. (1998). Varieties of pure alexia: The case of failure to access graphemic
representations. Cognitive Neuropsychology [Special Issue: Pure alexia (letter-by-letter reading], 15(1–2),
203–238.
Mitchell, D. C. (1982). The process of reading. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Mitchell, D. C. (2004). On-line methods in language processing: Introduction and historical review. In M.
Carreiras & C. J. Clifton (Eds.), The on-line study of sentence comprehension: Eyetracking, ERPs, and beyond.
Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Mitchell, D. C. , & Holmes, V. M. (1985). The role of specific information about the verb in parsing sentences
with local structural ambiguity. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 542–559.
Moats, L. C. (1994). Assessment of spelling in learning disabilities research. In G. R. Lyon (Ed.), Frames of
reference for the assessment of learning disabilities: New views on measurement issues (pp. 333–350).
Baltimore, MD : Paul Brookes
Moats, L. C. (2010). Speech to print: Language essentials for teachers (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes.
Moats, L. C. , & Foorman, B. R. (2003). Measuring teachers’ content knowledge of language and reading.
Annals of Dyslexia, 53, 23–45.
Mohan, P. J. (1978). Acoustic factors in letter cancellation: Developmental considerations. Developmental
Psychology, 14, 117–118.
Morais, J. , Cary, L. , Alegria, J. , & Bertelson, P. (1979). Does awareness of speech as a sequence of phones
arise spontaneously? Cognition, 7, 323–331.
Morgan, W. P. (1896). A case of congenital word blindness. British Medical Journal, 1871, 1378–1379.
Morris, R. D. , Stuebing, K. K. , Fletcher, J. M. , Shaywitz, S. E. , Lyon, G. R. , Shankweiler, D. P. , et al. (1998).
Subtypes of reading disability: Variability around a phonological core. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90
(3), 347–373.
Morris, R. K. (1994). Lexical and message-level sentence context effects on fixation times in reading. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 92–103.
Morris, R. K. , Rayner, K. , & Pollatsek, A. (1990). Eye movement guidance in reading: The role of parafoveal
letter and space information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16,
268–281.
Morrison, R. E. (1984). Manipulation of stimulus onset delay in reading: Evidence for parallel programming of
saccades. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 667–682.
Morrison, R. E. , & Inhoff, A. W. (1981).Visual factors and eye movements in reading. Visible Language, 15,
129–146.
Morrison, R. E. , & Rayner, K. (1981). Saccade size in reading depends upon character spaces and not visual
angle. Perception & Psychophysics, 30, 395–396.
Morton, J. (1964). The effects of context upon speed of reading, eye movement and eye–voice span. Quarterly
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 16, 340–354.
Morton, J. , & Frith, U. (1995). Causal modeling: A structural approach to developmental psychopathology. In D.
Cicchetti , & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology, Vol. 1: Theory and method (pp. 357–390).
Oxford, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Morton, J. , & Sasanuma, S. (1984). Lexical access in Japanese. In L. Henderson (Ed.), Orthographies and
reading. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
Mousty, P. , & Bertelson, P. (1985). A study of Braille reading: Reading speed as a function of hand usage and
context. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37A, 217–233.
Mozer, M. C. (1983). Letter migration in word perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception and Performance, 9, 531–546.
Murphy, L. A. , Pollatsek, A. , & Well, A. D. (1988). Developmental dyslexia and word retrieval deficits. Brain
and Language, 35(1), 1–23.
Muter, V. , Hulme, C. , Snowling, M. , & Taylor, S. (1997). Segmentation, not rhyming, predicts early progress in
learning to read. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 65, 370–396.
Myers, J. L. , & O'Brien, E. J. (1998). Accessing the discourse representation while reading. Discourse
Processes, 26 , 131–157.
Myers, J. L. , Shinjo, M. , & Duffy, S. A. (1987). Degree of causal relatedness and memory. Journal of Memory
and Language, 26, 453–465.
Myers, M. , & Paris, S. G. (1978). Children’s metacognitive knowledge about reading. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 70, 680–690.
Nation, K. (2005). Children’s reading comprehension difficulties. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The
science of reading: A handbook (pp. 248–265). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Nation, K. , Angell, P. , & Castles, A. (2007). Orthographic learning via self-teaching in children learning to read:
Effects of exposure, durability, and context. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 96, 71–84.
Nation, K. , Clarke, P. , Marshall, C. M. , & Durand, M. (2004). Hidden language impairments in children:
Parallels between poor reading comprehension and specific language impairment? Journal of Speech,
Language and Hearing Research, 47, 199–211.
Nation, K. , & Cocksey, J. (2009). The relationship between knowing a word and reading it aloud in children’s
word reading development. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 103, 296–308.
Nation, K. , & Hulme, C. (1998). Phonemic segmentation, not onset–rime segmentation, predicts early reading
and spelling skills: Response. Reading Research Quarterly, 33(3), 264–265.
Nation, K. , Marshall, C. M. , & Snowling, M. J. (2001). Phonological and semantic contributions to children’s
picture naming skill: Evidence from children with developmental reading disorders. Language and Cognitive
Processes [Special Issue: Language and Cognitive Processes in Developmental Disorders], 16(2–3), 241–259.
Nation, K. , & Snowling, M. J. (1998). Semantic processing and the development of word-recognition skills:
Evidence from children with reading comprehension difficulties. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 85–101.
Nation, K. , & Snowling, M. J. (1999). Developmental differences in sensitivity to semantic relations among
good and poor comprehenders: Evidence from semantic priming. Cognition, 70(1), B1–B13.
Nation, K. , & Snowling, M. J. (2004). Beyond phonological skills: Broader language skills contribute to the
development of reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 27(4), 342–356.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Reading Panel .(2000). Teaching children
to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for
reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00–4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Navon, D. , & Shimron, J. (1981). Does word meaning involve grapheme-to-phoneme translation? Evidence
from Hebrew. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 97–109.
Neely, J. H. (1977). Semantic priming and retrieval from lexical memory: The roles of inhibitionless spreading
activation and limited-capacity attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 106, 1–66.
Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton, Century Crofts.
Newman, E. B. (1966). Speed of reading when the span of letters is restricted. American Journal of
Psychology, 79 , 272–278.
Newman, T. M. , Macomber, D. , Naples, A. J. , Babitz, T. , Volkmar, F. , & Grigorenko, E. L. (2007). Hyperlexia
in children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37(4), 760–774.
Nicolson, R. I. , & Fawcett, A. J. (1994). Comparison of deficits in cognitive and motor skills among children with
dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 44, 147–164.
Nicolson, R. I. , Fawcett, A. J. , & Dean, P. (2001). Developmental dyslexia: The cerebellar deficit hypothesis.
Trends in Neurosciences, 24(9), 508–511.
Niensted, S. M. (1968). Hyperlexia: An educational disease? Exceptional Children, 35(2), 162–163.
Nikolopoulos, D. , Goulandris, N. , & Snowling, M. J. (2003). Developmental dyslexia in Greek. In N. Goulandris
(Ed.), Dyslexia in different languages: Cross-linguistic comparisons (pp. 53–67). Philadelphia, PA: Whurr
Publishers.
Niswander, E. , Pollatsek, A. , & Rayner K. (2000). The processing of derived and inflected suffixed words
during reading. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 389–420.
Niswander-Klement, E. , & Pollatsek, A. (2006). The effects of root frequency, word frequency, and length on
the processing of prefixed English words during reading. Memory & Cognition, 34, 685–702.
Nodine, C. F. , & Evans, D. (1969). Eye movements of prereaders to pseudowords containing letters of high
and low confusability. Perception & Psychophysics, 6, 39–41.
Nodine, C. F. , & Lang, N. J. (1971). Development of visual scanning strategies for differentiating words.
Developmental Psychology, 5, 221–232.
Nodine, C. F. , & Simmons, F. G. (1974). Processing distinctive features in the differentiation of letterlike
symbols. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 103, 21–28.
Nodine, C. F. , & Steurele, N. L. (1973). Development of perceptual and cognitive strategies for differentiating
graphemes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 8, 158–166.
Noordman, L. G. M. , Vonk, W. , & Kempff, H. J. (1992). Causal inferences during the reading of expository
texts. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 573–590.
Norris, D. (2006). The Bayesian reader: Explaining word recognition as an optimal Bayesian decision process.
Psychological Review, 113, 327–357.
Oakhill, J. V. (1984). Inferential and memory skills in children’s comprehension of stories. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 54, 31–39.
Oakhill, J. V. , Cain, K. , & Bryant, P. E. (2003). The dissociation of word reading and text comprehension:
evidence from component skills. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18, 443–468.
Oakhill, J. V. , & Yuill, N. (1996). Higher order factors in comprehension disability: Processes and remediation.
In C. Cornoldi , & J. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties: Processes and intervention (pp. 69–92).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
O'Brien, E. J. , & Albrecht, J. E. (1992). Comprehension strategies in the development of a mental model.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 777–784.
O'Brien, E. J. , Cook, A. E. , & Guéraud, S. (2010). Accessibility of outdated information. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 979–991.
O'Brien, E. J. , Rizzella, M. L. , Albrecht, J. E. , & Halleran, J. G. (1998). Updating a situation model: A memory-
based text processing view. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24,
1200–1210.
O'Brien, E. J. , Shank, D. M. , Myers, J. L. , & Rayner, K. (1988). Elaborative inferences during reading: Do they
occur on-line? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 410–420.
O'Connor, R. E. , & Forster, K. I. (1981). Criterion bias and search sequence bias in word recognition. Memory
& Cognition, 9, 78–92.
Olson, R. K. , & Datta, H. (2002).Visual-temporal processing in reading-disabled and normal twins. Reading
and Writing, 15(1–2), 127–149.
Olson, R. K. , Forsberg, H. , Wise, B. , & Rack, J. (1994). Measurement of word recognition, orthographic, and
phonological skills. In G. R. Lyon (Ed.), Frames of reference for the assessment of learning disabilities: New
views on measurement issues (pp. 243–277). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes.
Olson, R. K. , Kliegl, R. , & Davidson, B. J. (1983). Dyslexic and normal children’s tracking eye movements.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 816–825.
Olson, R. K. , Wise, B. , Conners, F. , & Rack, J. (1989). Specific deficits in component reading and language
skills: Genetic and environmental influences. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22(6), 339–348.
Omanson, R. C. (1985). Knowing words and understanding texts. In T. H. Carr (Ed.), The development of
reading skills. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Omanson, R. C. , Beck, I. L. , McKeown, M. G. , & Perfetti, C. A. (1984). Comprehension of texts with unfamiliar
versus recently taught words: Assessment of alternative models. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76,
1253–1268.
Oppenheim, G. M. , & Dell, G. S. (2008). Inner speech slips exhibit lexical bias, but not the phonemic similarity
effect. Cognition, 106, 527–537.
O'Regan, J. K. (1975). Structural and contextual constraints on eye movements in reading. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Cambridge, UK.
O'Regan, J. K. (1979). Eye guidance in reading: Evidence for linguistic control hypothesis. Perception &
Psychophysics, 25, 501–509.
O'Regan, J. K. (1980). The control of saccade size and fixation duration in reading: The limits of linguistic
control. Perception & Psychophysics, 28, 112–117.
O'Regan, J. K. (1981). The convenient viewing position hypothesis. In D. F. Fisher , R. A. Monty , & J. W.
Senders (Eds.), Eye movements: Cognition and visual perception. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Inc.
O'Regan, J. K. (1983). Elementary perception and eye movement control processes in reading. In K. Rayner
(Ed.), Eye movements in reading: Perceptual and language processes. New York: Academic Press.
O'Regan, J. K. , & Levy-Schoen, A. (1983). Integrating visual information from successive fixations: Does
transsaccadic fusion exist? Vision Research, 23, 765–768.
Orton, S. T. (1928). Specific reading disability–strephsymbolia. Journal of the American Medical Association,
90, 1095–1099.
Osaka, N. (1987). Effect of peripheral visual field size upon eye movements during Japanese text processing.
In J. K. O'Regan & A. Levy-Schoen (Eds.), Eye movements: From physiology to cognition. Amsterdam:
Elsevier.
Ouellette, G. P. (2006). What’s meaning got to do with it: The role of vocabulary in word reading and reading
comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 554–566.
Paap, K. R. , Newsome, S. L. , McDonald, J. E. , & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1982). An activation-verification model
for letter and word recognition: The word superiority effect. Psychological Review, 89, 573–594.
Paap, K. R. , Newsome, S. L. , & Noel, R. W. (1984). Word shape’s in poor shape for the race to the lexicon.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 413–428.
Palinscar, A. S. , & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension fostering and monitoring
activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117–175.
Palmer, J. , MacLeod, C. M. , Hunt, E. , & Davidson, J. E. (1985). Information processing correlates of reading.
Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 59–88.
Pammer, K. , Hansen, P. C. , Kringelback, M. L. , Holliday, I. , Barnes, G. , Hillebrand, A. , et al. (2004).Visual
word recognition: The first half second. NeuroImage, 22, 1819–1825.
Paris, S. G. , Cross, D. R. , & Lipson, M. Y. (1984). Informed strategies for learning: A program to improve
children’s reading awareness and comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 1239–1252.
Paris, S. G. , & Jacobs, J. E. (1984). The benefits of informed instruction for children’s reading awareness and
comprehension skills. Child Development, 55, 2083–2093.
Parker, S. W. (1919). Pseudo-talent for words. Psychology Clinics, 11, 1–7.
Parkin, A. J. (1982). Phonological recoding in lexical decision: Effects of spelling-to-sound regularity depend on
how regularity is defined. Memory & Cognition, 10, 43–53.
Pastizzo, M. J. , & Feldman, L. B. (2002). Discrepancies between orthographic and unrelated baselines in
masked priming undermine a decompositional account of morphological facilitation. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 244–249.
Patterson, K. E. (1982). The relation between reading and phonological coding: Further neuropsychological
observations. In A. W. Ellis (Ed.), Normality and pathology in cognitive functions. London: Academic Press.
Patterson, K. E. , & Kay, J. (1982). Letter-by-letter reading: Psychological descriptions of a neurological
syndrome. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 34A, 411–422.
Patterson, K. E. , & Marcel, A. (1977). Aphasia, dyslexia, and the phonological code of written words. Quarterly
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29, 307–318.
Patterson, K. E. , Marshall, J. C. , & Coltheart, M. (1985). Surface dyslexia: Neuropsychological and cognitive
studies of phonological reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Patti, P. J. , & Lupinetti, L. (1993). Brief report: Implications of hyperlexia in an autistic savant. Journal of Autism
and Developmental Disorders, 23(2), 397–405.
Pavlidis, G. T. (1981). Do eye movements hold the key to dyslexia? Neuropsychologia, 19, 57–64.
Pavlidis, G. T. (1985). Eye movement differences between dyslexics, normal, and retarded readers while
sequentially fixating digits. American Journal of Optometry & Physiological Optics, 62, 820–832.
Pearlmutter, N. J. , & MacDonald, M. C. (1995). Individual differences and probabilistic constraints in syntactic
ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 521–542.
Pearson, D. (1976). A psycholinguistic model of reading. Language Arts, 53, 309–314.
Penfield, W. , & Roberts, L. (1959). Speech and brain mechanisms. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Pennington, B. F. , Filipek, P. A. , Lefly, D. , Churchwell, J. , Kennedy, D. N. , Simon, J. H. , et al. (1999). Brain
morphometry in reading-disabled twins. Neurology, 53, 723–729.
Pennington, B. F. , Van Orden, G. C. , Smith, S. D. , Green, P. A. , & Haith, M. M. (1990). Phonological
processing skills and deficits in adult dyslexics. Child Development, 61(6), 1753–1778.
Perea, M. , Abu Mallouh, R. , & Carreiras, M. (2010). The search of an input coding scheme: Transposed-letter
priming in Arabic. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 375–380.
Perea, M. , & Acha, J. (2009). Space information is important for reading. Vision Research, 49, 1994–2000.
Perea, M. , & Carreiras, M. (2007). Do transposed-letter similarity effects occur at a prelexical phonological
level? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1600–1613.
Perea, M. , & Lupker, S. J. (2003). Does jugde activate COURT? Transposed-letter confusability effects in
masked associative priming. Memory & Cognition, 31, 829–841.
Perea, M. , & Lupker, S. J. (2004). Can CANISO activate CASINO? Transposed-letter similarity effects with
nonadjacent letter positions. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 231–246.
Perea, M. , & Pollatsek, A. (1998). The effects of neighborhood frequency in reading and lexical decision.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 767–779.
Perea, M. , & Rosa, E. (2002). Does ‘whole word shape’ play a role in visual word recognition? Perception &
Psychophysics, 64, 785–794.
Perea, M. , Rosa, E. , & Gómez, C. (2005). The frequency effect for pseudowords in the lexical decision task.
Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 301–314.
Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York: Oxford University Press.
Perfetti, C. A. (1988).Verbal efficiency in reading ability. In M. Daneman , G. E. Mackinnon , & T. G. Waller
(Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice, Vol. 6 (pp. 109–143). San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Perfetti, C. A. (1992). The representation problem in reading acquisition. In P. B. Gough , L. C. Ehri , & R.
Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 145–174). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Perfetti, C. A. (1994). Psycholinguistics and reading ability. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of
psycholinguistics (pp. 849–894). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Perfetti, C. A. (1998). Two basic questions about reading and learning to read. In P. Reitsma & L. Verhoeven
(Eds.), Problems and interventions in literacy development (pp. 15–47). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer
Academic.
Perfetti, C. A. (2003). The universal grammar of reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 7(3), 3–24.
Perfetti, C. A. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading [Special
Issue: What should the scientific study of reading be now and in the near future?], 11(4), 357–383.
Perfetti, C. A. , Beck, I. , Bell, L. , & Hughes, C. (1988). Phonemic knowledge and learning to read are
reciprocal: A longitudinal study of first grade children. In K. Stanovich (Ed.), Children’s reading and the
development of phonological awareness (pp. 39–75). Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.
Perfetti, C. A. , Bell, L. C. , & Delaney, C. (1988). Automatic phonetic activation in silent word reading: Evidence
from backward masking. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 59–70.
Perfetti, C. A. , Beverly, S. , Bell, L. C. , & Hughes, C. (1987). Phonemic knowledge and learning to read: A
longitudinal study of first grade children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 33, 283–319.
Perfetti, C. A. , & Goldman, S. R. (1976). Discourse memory and reading comprehension skill. Journal of Verbal
Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 33–42.
Perfetti, C. A. , Goldman, S. R. , & Hogaboam, T. W. (1979). Reading skill and the identification of words in
discourse context. Memory & Cognition, 7, 273–282.
Perfetti, C. A. , & Hart, L. (2001). The lexical basis of comprehension skill. In D. S. Gorfein (Ed.), On the
consequences of meaning selection: Perspectives on resolving lexical ambiguity (pp. 67–86). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Perfetti, C. A. , & Hart, L. (2002). The lexical quality hypothesis. In L. Vehoeven . C. Elbro , & P. Reitsma (Eds.),
Precursors of functional literacy (pp. 189–213). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Perfetti, C. A. , & Hogaboam, T. W. (1975). The relationship between single word decoding and reading
comprehension skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 461–469.
Perfetti, C. A. , Marron, M. A. , & Foltz, P. W. (1996). Sources of comprehension failure: Theoretical
perspectives and case studies. In C. Cornoldi , & J. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties:
Processes and intervention (pp. 137–165). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Perfetti, C. A. , & McCutchen, D. (1982). Speech processes in reading. In N. Lass , (Ed.), Speech and
language: Advances in basic research and practice (Vol. 7, pp. 237–269). New York: Academic Press.
Perfetti, C. A. , & Sandak, R. (2000). Reading optimally builds on spoken language: Implications for deaf
readers. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(1), 32–50.
Perfetti, C. A. , & Tan, L. H. (1998). The time course of graphic, phonological, and semantic activation in
Chinese character identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24,
101–118.
Perry, C. , Ziegler, J. C. , & Zorzi, M. (2007). Nested incremental modeling in the development of computational
theories: The CDP+ model of reading aloud. Psychological Review, 114, 273–315.
Petersen, S. E. , Fox, I. T. , Posner, M. I. , Mintun, M. , & Raichle, M. E. (1988). Positron emission tomographic
studies of the cortical anatomy of single-word processing, Nature, 331, 858–1589.
Phillips, C. , & Wagers, M. (2007). Relating structure and time in linguistics and psycholinguistics. In M. G.
Gaskell (Ed.), Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 739–756). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Phillips, G. , & McNaughton, S. (1990). The practice of storybook reading to preschool children in mainstream
New Zealand families. Reading Research Quarterly, 25(3), 196–212.
Phinney, E. , Pennington, B. F. , Olson, R. , Filley, C. M. , & Filipek, P. A. (2007). Brain structure correlates of
component reading processes: Implications for reading disability. Cortex, 43(6), 777–791.
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: International Universities Press.
Pichert, J. W. , & Anderson, R. C. (1977). Taking different perspectives on a story. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 69, 309–315.
Pick, A. D. , Unze, M. G. , Brownell, C. A. , Drozdal, J. G. , & Hopmann, M. R. (1978). Young children’s
knowledge of word structure. Child Development, 49, 669–680.
Pickering, M. J. , & Frisson, S. (2001). Processing ambiguous verbs: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 556–573.
Pickering, M. J. , McElree, B. , Frisson, S. , Chen, L. , & Traxler, M. (2006). Underspecification and aspectual
coercion. Discourse Processes, 42, 131–155.
Pickering, M. J. , Traxler, M. J. , & Crocker, M. W. (2000). Ambiguity resolution in sentence processing:
Evidence against frequency-based accounts. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 447–475.
Pickering, M. J. , & van Gompel, R. P. G. (2006). Syntactic parsing. In M. J. Traxler & M. A. Gernsbacher
(Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics ( 2nd ed., pp. 455–503). London: Academic Press.
Piñango, M. M. , Zurif, E. , & Jackendoff, R. (1999). Real-time processing implications of enriched composition
at the syntax–semantics interface. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28, 395–414.
Pinnell, G. S. , & Fountas, I. C. (2000). Guided reading: Research base for guided reading as an instructional
approach. Retrieved from the Scholastic website:
http://teacher.scholastic.com/products/guidedreading/pdfs/GR_ResearchBase.pdf
Pintner, R. (1913). Inner speech silent reading. Psychological Review, 20, 129–153.
Pirozzola, F. J. , & Rayner, K. (1977). Hemispheric specialization in reading and word recognition. Brain and
Language, 4 , 248–261.
Pirozzola, F. J. , & Rayner, K. (1978). The normal control of eye movements in acquired and developmental
reading disorders. In H. Avakian-Whitaker and H. A. Whitaker (Eds.), Advances in neurolinguistics and
psycholinguistics. New York: Academic Press.
Plaut, D. C. , McClelland, J. L. , Seidenberg, M. S. , & Patterson, K. E. (1996). Understanding normal and
impaired word reading: Computational principles in quasi-regular domains. Psychological Review, 103, 56–115.
Plomin, R. , & Kovas, Y. (2005). Generalist genes and learning disabilities. Psychological Bulletin, 131(4),
592–617.
Poldrack, R. A. , & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2001). Characterizing the neural mechanisms of skill learning and
repetition priming. Evidence from mirror-reading. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 124, 67–82.
Pollatsek, A. , Bolozky, S. , Well, A. D. , & Rayner, K. (1981). Asymmetries in the perceptual span for Israeli
readers. Brain and Language, 14, 174–180.
Pollatsek, A. , Drieghe, D. , Stockall, L. , & de Almeida, R. G. (2010). The interpretation of ambiguous
trimorphemic words in sentence context. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 88–94.
Pollatsek, A. , & Hyönä, J. (2005). The role of semantic transparency in the processing of Finnish compound
words. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20, 261–290.
Pollatsek, A. , Hyönä, J. , & Bertram, R. (2000). The role of morphological constituents in reading Finnish
compound words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 820–833.
Pollatsek, A. , Lesch, M. , Morris, R. K. , & Rayner, K. (1992). Phonological codes are used in integrating
information across saccades in word identification and reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception and Performance, 18, 148–162.
Pollatsek, A. , Perea, M. , & Binder, K. (1999). The effects of neighborhood size in reading and lexical decision.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1142–1158.
Pollatsek, A. , Perea, M. , & Carreiras, M. (2005). Does conal prime CANAL more than cinal? Masked
phonological priming effects with the lexical decision task. Memory & Cognition, 33, 557–565.
Pollatsek, A. , Raney, G. E. , LaGasse, L. , & Rayner, K. (1993). The use of information below fixation in
reading and in visual search. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 179–200.
Pollatsek, A. , & Rayner, K. (1982). Eye movement control in reading: The role of word boundaries. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 817–833.
Pollatsek, A. , Rayner, K. , & Balota, D. A. (1986). Inferences about eye movement control from the perceptual
span in reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 40, 123–130.
Pollatsek, A. , Reichle, E. D. , & Rayner, K. (2003). Modeling eye movements in reading. In J. Hyönä , R.,
Radach , & H. Deubel (Eds.). The mind’s eyes: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp.
361–390). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Pollatsek, A. , Reichle, E. D. , & Rayner, K. (2006). Tests of the E-Z Reader model: Exploring the interface
between cognition and eye-movement control. Cognitive Psychology, 52, 1–52.
Pollatsek, A. , Slattery, T. J. , & Juhasz, B. J. (2008). The processing of novel and lexicalized prefixed words in
reading. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 1133–1158.
Pollatsek, A. , Tan, L-H. , & Rayner, K. (2000). The role of phonological codes in integrating information across
saccadic eye movements in Chinese character identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception and Performance, 26, 607–633.
Porpodas, C. D. (2006). Literacy acquisition in Greek: Research review of the role of phonological and cognitive
factors. In R. M. Joshi & P. G. Aaron (Eds.), Handbook of orthography and literacy (pp. 189–199). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Posnansky, C. J. , & Rayner, K. (1977).Visual-feature and response components in a picture–word interference
task with begining and skilled readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 24, 440–460.
Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 3–25.
Posner, M. I. , & Boies, S. W. (1971). Components of attention. Psychological Review, 78, 391–408.
Posner, M. I. , & Snyder, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. Solso (Ed.), Information
processing and cognition: The Loyola symposium. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Potter, M. C. , Kroll, J. F. , & Harris, C. (1980). Comprehension and memory in rapid, sequential reading. In R.
S. Nickerson , (Ed.), Attention and performance (Vol. 8). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Poulton, E. C. (1962).Peripheral vision, refractoriness and eye movements in fast oral reading. British Journal
of Psychology, 53, 409–419.
Preis, S. , Jänke, L. , Schmitz-Hillebrecht, J. , & Steinmetz, H. (1999). Child age and planum temporale
asymmetry. Brain and Cognition, 40, 441–452.
Pritchard, R. M. (1961). Stabilized images on the retina. Scientific American, 204, 72–78.
Pugh, K. R. , Mencl, W. E. , Jenner, A. R. , Katz, L. , Frost, S. J. , Lee, J. R. , et al. (2000). Functional
neuroimaging studies of reading and reading disability (developmental dyslexia). Mental Retardation and
Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews [Special Issue: Pediatric Neuroimaging], 6(3), 207–213.
Pugh, K. R. , Mencl, W. E. , Jenner, A. R. , Katz, L. , Frost, S. J. , Lee, J. R. , et al. (2001a). Neurobiological
studies of reading and reading disability. Journal of Communication Disorders, 34(6), 479–492.
Pugh, K. R. , Mencl, W. E. , Jenner, A. R. , Lee, J. R. , Katz, L. , Frost, S. J. , et al. (2001b). Neuroimaging
studies of reading development and reading disability. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice [Special Issue:
Emergent and Early Literacy: Current Status and Research Directions], 16(4), 240–249.
Pugh, K. , Shaywitz, B. , Constable, T. , Shaywitz, S. , Skudlarski, P. , Fulbright, R. , et al. (1996). Cerebral
organization of component processes in reading. Brain, 119, 1221–1238.
Pylkkänen, L. , & McElree, B. (2006). The syntax–semantic interface: On-line composition of sentence
meaning. In M. Traxler & M. A. Gernsbacher (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics ( 2nd ed., pp. 539–580).
New York : Elsevier.
Quinn, L. (1981). Reading skills of hearing and congenitally deaf children. Journal of Experimental Child
Psychology, 32, 139–161.
Rack, J. P. , Snowling, M. J. , & Olson, R. K. (1992). The nonword reading deficit in developmental dyslexia: A
review. Reading Research Quarterly, 27(1), 28–53.
Radach, R. (1996). Blickbewegungen beim Lesen: Psychologisshe Aspekte der Determination von
Fixationspositionen. (Eye movements in reading: Psychological factors that determine fixation locations).
Munster, Germany: Waxmann.
Rader, N. (1975). From written words to meaning: A developmental study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Cornell University.
Ramus, F. (2003). Developmental dyslexia: Specific phonological deficit or general sensorimotor dysfunction?
Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 13(2), 212–218.
Ramus, F. (2004a). Neurobiology of dyslexia: A reinterpretation of the data. Trends in Neurosciences, 27(12),
720–726.
Ramus, F. (2004b). The neural basis of reading acquisition. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive
neurosciences ( 3rd ed., pp. 815–824). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Rankin, E. F. (1970). How flexibly do we read? Journal of Reading Behavior, 3, 34–38.
Rastle, K. , Davis, M. H. , Marslen-Wilson, W. D. , & Tyler, L. K. (2000). Morphological and semantic effects in
visual word recognition: A time course study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 507–538.
Rastle, K. , Davis, M. H. , & New, B. (2004). The broth in my brother’s brothel: Morpho-orthographic
segmentation in visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 1090–1098.
Rastle, K. , Tyler, L. K. , & Marslen-Wilson, W. (2006). New evidence for morphological errors in deep dyslexia.
Brain and Language, 97(2), 189–199.
Ratcliff, R. , Gomez, P. , McKoon, G. (2004). A diffusion model account of the lexical decision task.
Psychological Review, 111 , 159–182.
Rawson, M. B. (1995). Dyslexia over the lifespan: A fifty-five year longitudinal study. Cambridge, MA:
Educator’s Publishing Service.
Rayner, K. (1975a). The perceptual span and peripheral cues in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 65–81.
Rayner, K. (1975b). Parafoveal identification during a fixation in reading. Acta Psychologica, 39, 271–282.
Rayner, K. (1976). Developmental changes in word recognition strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology,
68, 323–329
Rayner, K. (1978a). Eye movements in reading and information processing. Psychological Bulletin, 85,
618–660.
Rayner, K. (1978b). Foveal and parafoveal cues in reading. In J. Requin (Ed.), Attention and performance VII.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Rayner, K. (1979). Eye guidance in reading: Fixation locations within words. Perception, 8, 21–30.
Rayner, K. (1983). Eye movements in reading: Perceptual and language processes. New York: Academic
Press.
Rayner, K. (1984). Visual selection in reading, picture perception, and visual search: A tutorial review. In H.
Bouma & D. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rayner, K. (1985). Do faulty eye movements cause dyslexia? Developmental Neuropsychology, 1, 3–15.
Rayner, K. (1986). Eye movements and the perceptual span in beginning and skilled readers. Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 41, 211–236.
Rayner, K. (1988). Word recognition cues in children: The relative use of graphemic cues, orthographic cues
and grapheme–phoneme correspondence rules. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 473–479.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: Twenty years of research.
Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372–422.
Rayner, K. (2009). The Thirty-Fifth Sir Frederick Bartlett Lecture: Eye movements and attention during reading,
scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1457–1506.
Rayner, K. , Ashby, J. , Pollatsek, A. , & Reichle, E. D. (2004). The effects of frequency and predictability on
eye fixations in reading: Implications for the E-Z reader model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception and Performance, 30, 720–732.
Rayner, K. , Balota, D. A. , & Pollatsek, A. (1986). Against parafoveal semantic preprocessing during eye
fixations in reading. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 40, 473–483.
Rayner, K. , & Bertera, J. H. (1979). Reading without a fovea. Science, 206, 468–469.
Rayner, K. , Carlson, M. , & Frazier, L. (1983). The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence
processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences, Journal of Verbal Learning and
Verbal Behavior, 22, 358–374.
Rayner, K. , Castelhano, M. S. , & Yang, J. (2009a). Eye movements and the perceptual span in older and
younger readers. Psychology and Aging, 24, 755–760.
Rayner, K. , Castelhano, M. S. , & Yang, J. (2009b). Eye movements when looking at unusual/weird scenes:
Are there cultural differences? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35,
254–259.
Rayner, K. , Castelhano, M. S. , & Yang, J. (2010). Eye movements and preview benefit in older and younger
readers. Psychology and Aging, 25, 714–718.
Rayner, K. , & Clifton, C., Jr. (2002). Language comprehension. In D. L. Medin (Ed.), Stevens’ Handbook of
Experimental Psychology:Volume X (pp. 261–316). New York: Wiley.
Rayner, K. , & Clifton, C. Jr. (2009). Language processing in reading and speech perception is fast and
incremental: Implications for event-related potential research. Biological Psychology, 80, 4–9.
Rayner, K. , Cook, A. E. , Juhasz, B. J. , & Frazier, L. (2006). Immediate disambiguation of lexically ambiguous
words during reading: Evidence from eye movements. British Journal of Psychology, 97, 467–482.
Rayner, K. , & Duffy, S. A. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency,
verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory & Cognition, 14, 191–201.
Rayner, K. , & Fischer, M. H. (1996). Mindless reading revisited: Eye movements during reading and scanning
are different. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 734–747.
Rayner, K. , Fischer, M. H. , & Pollatsek, A. (1998). U d text interferes with both word identification and eye
movement control. Vision Research, 38, 1129–1144.
Rayner, K. , & Fisher, D. L. (1987). Letter processing during eye fixations in visual search. Perception &
Psychophysics, 42, 87–100.
Rayner, K. , Foorman, B. R. , Perfetti, C. A. , Pesetsky, D. , & Seidenberg, M. S. (2001). How psychological
science informs the teaching of reading. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2, 31–74.
Rayner, K. , Foorman, B. F. , Perfetti, C. A. , Pesetsky, D. , & Seidenberg, M. S. (2002). How should reading be
taught? Scientific American, 286(3), 84–91.
Rayner, K. , & Frazier, L. (1987). Parsing temporarily ambiguous complements. Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 39A, 657–673.
Rayner, K. , & Frazier, L. (1989). Selection mechanisms in reading lexically ambiguous words. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 779–790.
Rayner, K. , & Hagelberg, E. M. (1975). Word recognition cues for beginning and skilled readers. Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 20, 444–455.
Rayner, K. , Inhoff, A. W. , Morrison, R. , Slowiaczek, M. L. , & Bertera, J. H. (1981). Masking of foveal and
parfoveal vision during eye fixations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance, 7, 167–179.
Rayner, K. , & Johnson, R. L. (2005). Letter-by-letter acquired dyslexia is due to the serial encoding of letters.
Psychological Science, 16(7), 530–534.
Rayner, K. , Juhasz, B. J. , & Brown, S. (2007). Do readers acquire preview benefit from word n+2? A test of
serial attention shift versus distributed lexical processing models of eye movement control in reading. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 230–245.
Rayner, K. , Kambe, G. , & Duffy, S. (2000). The effect of clause wrap-up on eye movements during reading.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A, 1061–1080.
Rayner, K. , Li, X. , & Pollatsek, A. (2007). Extending the E-Z Reader model of eye movement control to
Chinese readers. Cognitive Science, 31, 1021–1034.
Rayner, K. , Li, X. , Juhasz, B. J. , & Yan, G. (2005). The effect of predictability on the eye movements of
Chinese readers. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 1089–1093.
Rayner, K. , Li, X. , Williams, C. C. , Cave, K. R. , & Well, A. D. (2007). Eye movements during information
processing tasks: Individual differences and cultural effects. Vision Research, 47, 2714–2726.
Rayner, K. , Liversedge, S. P. , & White, S. J. (2006). Eye movements when reading disappearing text: The
importance of the word to the right of fixation. Vision Research, 46, 310–323.
Rayner, K. , Liversedge, S. P. , White, S. J. , & Vergilino-Perez, D. (2003). Reading disappearing text: Cognitive
control on eye movements. Psychological Science, 14, 383–389.
Rayner, K. , & McConkie, G. W. (1976). What guides a reader’s eye movements? Vision Research, 16,
829–837.
Rayner, K. , McConkie, G. W. , & Ehrlich, S. F. (1978). Eye movements and integrating information across
fixations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4, 529–544.
Rayner, K. , McConkie, G. W. , & Zola, D. (1980). Integrating information across eye movements. Cognitive
Psychology, 12, 206–226.
Rayner, K. , & Morris, R. K. (1992). Eye movement control in reading: Evidence against semantic
preprocessing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 163–172.
Rayner, K. , Murphy, L. , Henderson, J. M. , & Pollatsek, A. (1989). Selective attentional dyslexia. Cognitive
Neuropsychology, 6, 357–378.
Rayner, K. , Pacht, J. M. , & Duffy, S. A. (1994). Effects of prior encounter and global discourse bias on the
processing of lexically ambiguous words: Evidence from eye fixations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33,
527–544.
Rayner, K. , & Pollatsek, A. (1981). Eye movement control during reading: Evidence for direct control. Quarterly
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 351–373.
Rayner, K. , & Pollatsek, A. (1989). The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Rayner, K. , Pollatsek, A. , Liversedge, S. P. , & Reichle, E. D. (2009). Eye movements and non-canonical
reading: Comments on Kennedy and Pynte (2008). Vision Research, 49, 2232–2236.
Rayner, K. , & Posnansky, C. (1978). Stages of processing in word identification. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: General, 107, 64–80.
Rayner, K. , & Raney, G. E. (1996). Eye movement control in reading and visual search: Effects of word
frequency. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 245–248.
Rayner, K. , & Reichle, E. D. (2010). Models of the reading process. WIRES Cognitive Science, 1, 787–799.
Rayner, K. , Reichle, E. D. , Stroud, M. D. , Williams, C. W. , & Pollatsek, A. (2006). The effect of word
frequency, word predictability, and font difficulty on the eye movements of young and older readers. Psychology
and Aging, 21, 448–465.
Rayner, K. , Sereno, S. C. , Lesch, M. F. , & Pollatsek, A. (1995). Phonological codes are automatically
activated during reading: Evidence from an eye movement priming paradigm. Psychological Science, 6, 26–32.
Rayner, K. , Sereno, S. C. , Morris, R. K. , Schmauder, A. R. , & Clifton, C. (1989). Eye movements and on-line
comprehension processes. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, 21–49.
Rayner, K. , Sereno, S. C. , & Raney, G. E. (1996). Eye movement control in reading: A comparison of two
types of models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 1188–1200.
Rayner, K. , Slattery, T. J. , & Bélanger N. (2010). Eye movements, the perceptual span, and reading speed.
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 834–839.
Rayner, K. , Slattery, T. J. , Drieghe, D. , & Liversedge, S. P. (2011). Eye movements and word skipping during
reading: Effects of word length and predictability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance, 37, 514–528.
Rayner, K. , Slowiaczek, M. L. , Clifton, C. Jr. , & Bertera, J. H. (1983). Latency of sequential eye movements:
Implications for reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9,
912–922.
Rayner, K. , Warren, T. , Juhasz, B. J. , & Liversedge, S. P. (2004). The effects of plausibility on eye
movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 1290–1301.
Rayner, K. , & Well, A. D. (1996). Effects of contextual constraint on eye movements in reading: A further
examination. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 504–509.
Rayner, K. , Well, A. D. , & Pollatsek, A. (1980). Asymmetry of the effective visual field in reading. Perception &
Psychophysics, 27, 537–544.
Rayner, K. , Well, A. D. , Pollatsek, A. , & Bertera, J. H. (1982). The availability of useful information to the right
of fixation in reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 31, 537–550.
Rayner, K. , White, S. J. , Johnson, R. L. , & Liversedge, S. P. (2006). Raeding wrods with jubmled lettres:
There’s a cost. Psychological Science, 17, 192–193.
Rayner, K. , Yang, J. , Castelhano, M. S. , & Liversedge, S. P. (2011). Eye movements of older and younger
readers when reading disappearing text. Psychology and Aging, 26, 214–223.
Reicher, G. M. (1969). Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus material. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 81, 275–280.
Reichle, E. D. (2011). Serial attention models of reading. In S. P. Liversedge , I. D. Gilchrist , & S. Everling
(Eds.), Oxford handbook on eye movements (pp. 767–780). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Reichle, E. D. (2012). Computational models of reading. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Reichle, E. D. , & Laurent, P. A. (2006). Using reinforcement learning to understand the emergence of
‘intelligent’ eye-movement behavior during reading. Psychological Review, 113, 390–408.
Reichle, E. D. , Liversedge, S. P. , Pollatsek, A. , & Rayner, K. (2009). Encoding multiple words simultaneously
in reading is implausible. Trends in Cognitive Science, 13, 115–119.
Reichle, E. D. , Pollatsek, A. , Fisher, D. L. , & Rayner, K. (1998). Towards a model of eye movement control in
reading. Psychological Review, 105, 125–157.
Reichle, E. D. , Rayner, K. , & Pollatsek, A. (2003). The E-Z Reader model of eye movement control in reading:
Comparison to other models. Brain and Behavioral Sciences, 26, 445–476.
Reichle, E. D. , Rayner, K. , & Pollatsek, A. (2007). Modeling the effects of lexical ambiguity on eye movements
during reading. In R. P. G. Van Gompel , M. F. Fischer , W. S. Murray , & R. L. Hill (Eds.), Eye movements: A
window on mind and brain (pp. 271–292). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Reichle, E. D. , Reineberg, A. E. , & Schooler, J. W. (2010). Eye movements during mindless reading.
Psychological Science, 21, 1300–1310.
Reichle, E. D. , Vanyukov, P. M. , Laurent, P. A. , & Warren, T. (2008). Serial or parallel? Using depth-of-
processing to examine attention allocation during reading. Vision Research, 48, 1831–1836.
Reichle, E. D. , Warren, T. , & McConnell, K. (2009). Using E-Z Reader to model the effects of higher-level
language processing on eye movements during reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 1–21.
Reilly, R. , & Radach, R. (2006). Some empirical tests of an interactive activation model of eye movement
control in reading. Cognitive Systems Research, 7, 34–55.
Reingold, E. M. (2003). Eye movement control in reading: Models and predictions. Behaviorial and Brain
Sciences, 26, 500–501.
Reingold, E. M. , & Rayner, K. (2006). Examining the word identification stages hypothesized by the E–Z
Reader model. Psychological Science, 17, 742–746.
Reitsma, P. (1983a). Printed word learning in beginning readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 36,
321–339.
Reitsma, P. (1983b). Word-specific knowledge in beginning reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 6, 41–56.
Richman, L. C. , & Wood, K. M. (2002). Learning disability subtypes: Classification of high functioning
hyperlexia. Brain and Language, 82(1), 10–21.
Ricketts, J. , Nation, K. , & Bishop, D.V. M. (2007).Vocabulary is important for some, but not all reading skills.
Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(3), 235–257.
Robertson, E. K. , Joanisse, M. F. , Desroches, A. S. , & Ng, S. (2009). Categorical speech perception deficits
distinguish language and reading impairments in children. Developmental Science, 12(5), 753–767.
Robichon, F. , & Habib, M. (1998). Abnormal callosal morphology in male adult dyslexics: Relationships to
handedness and phonological abilities. Brain and Language, 62(1), 127–146.
Rochelle, K. S. H. , & Talcott, J. B. (2006). Impaired balance in developmental dyslexia? A meta-analysis of the
contending evidence. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47(11), 1159–1166.
Rosen, S. , & Manganari, E. (2001). Is there a relationship between speech and nonspeech auditory processing
in children with dyslexia? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 720–736.
Rosinski, R. R. (1977). Picture–word interference is semantically based. Child Development, 48, 643–647.
Rosinski, R. R. , Golinkoff, R. M. , & Kukish, K. (1975). Automatic semantic processing in a picture–word
interference task. Child Development, 46, 243–253.
Rothkopf, E. Z. (1978). Analyzing eye movements to infer processing styles during learning from text. In J. W.
Senders , D. F. Fisher , & R. A. Monty (Eds.), Eye movements and the higher psychological functions. Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Rothkopf , E. Z. , & Billington, M. Z. (1979). Goal-guided learning from text: Inferring a descriptive processing
model from inspection times and eye movements. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 310–327.
Routman, R. (1988). Transitions: From learning to literacy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Routman, R. (1991). Invitations: Changing as teachers and learners K-12. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Rozin, P. , Bressman, B. , & Taft, M. (1974). Do children understand the basic relationship between speech and
writing? The Mow–Motorcycle test. Journal of Reading Behavior, 6, 327–334.
Rozin, P. , & Gleitman, L. R. (1977). The structure and acquisition of reading II: The reading process and the
acquisition of the alphabetic principle. In A. S. Reber & D. L. Scarborough (Eds.), Toward a psychology of
reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Rubenstein, H. , Lewis, S. S. , & Rubenstein, M. H. (1971). Evidence for phonemic recoding in visual word
recognition. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 10, 645–647.
Rueckl, J. G. , & Seidenberg, M. S. (2009). Computational modeling and the neural bases of reading and
reading disorders. In K. Pugh & P. McCardle (Eds.), How children learn to read: Current issues and new
directions in the integration of cognition, neurobiology and genetics of reading and dyslexia research and
practice (pp. 101–134). New York : Psychology Press.
Rugel, R. P. (1974). WISC subtest scores of disabled readers: A review with respect to Bannatyne’s
recategorization. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 7, 48–55.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1975). Notes on a schema for stories. In D. G. Bobrow & A. M. Collins (Eds.),
Representations and understanding: Studies in cognitive science. New York: Academic Press.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance
VI. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Rumelhart, D. E. , & McClelland, J. L. (1982). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter
perception: Part 2. Psychological Review, 89, 60–94.
Rumelhart, D. E. , & McClelland, J. L. (Eds.). (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the
microstructure of cognition (Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Rumsey, J. M. , Andreason, P. , Zametkin, A. J. , & Aquino, T. (1992). Failure to activate the left
temporoparietal cortex in dyslexia: An oxygen 15 positron emission tomographic study. Archives of Neurology,
49(5), 527–534.
Rumsey, J. M. , Donohue, B. C. , Brady, D. R. , Nace, K. , Giedd, J. N. , & Andreason, P. (1997). A magnetic
resonance imaging study of planum temporale asymmetry in men with developmental dyslexia. Archives of
Neurology, 54(12), 1481–1489.
Rumsey, J. M. , Dorwart, R. , Vermess, M. , Denckla, M. B. , Kuesi, M. J. P. , & Rappaport, J. L. (1986).
Magnetic resonance imaging of brain anatomy in severe developmental dyslexia. Archives of Neurology,
43(10), 1045–1046.
Rutter, M. , Caspi, A. , Fergusson, D. , Horwood, L. J. , Goodman, R. , Maughan, B. , et al. (2004). Sex
differences in developmental reading disability: New findings from 4 epidemiological studies. JAMA: Journal of
the American Medical Association, 291(16), 2007–2012.
Ryan, E. B. (1982). Identifying and remediating failures in reading comprehension: Toward an instructional
approach for poor comprehenders. In G. E. MacKinnon & T. G. Waller (Eds.), Advances in reading research
(Vol 3). New York: Academic Press.
Sailor, A. L. , & Ball, S. E. (1975). Peripheral vision training in reading speed and comprehension. Perceptual
and Motor Skills, 41, 761–762.
Saint-Aubin, J. , Kenny, S. , & Roy-Charland, A. (2010). The role of eye movements in the missing-letter effect
revisited with the rapid serial visual presentation procedure. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64,
47–52.
Saldaña, D. , Carreiras, M. , & Frith, U. (2009). Orthographic and phonological pathways in hyperlexic readers
with autism spectrum disorders. Developmental Neuropsychology, 34(3), 240–253.
Samuels, S. J. , & Flor, R. F. (1997). The importance of automaticity for developing expertise in reading.
Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 13, 107–121.
Samuels, S. J. , LaBerge, D. , & Bremer, C. D. (1978). Units of word recognition: Evidence of developmental
change. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 715–720.
Sandak, R. , Mencl, W. E. , Frost, S. J. , Rueckl, J. G. , Katz, L. , Moore, D. L. , et al. (2004). The neurobiology
of adaptive learning in reading: A contrast of different training conditions. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral
Neuroscience, 4(1), 67–88.
Sanford, A. J. , & Garrod, S. C. (1998). The role of scenario mapping in text comprehension. Discourse
Processes, 26 , 159–190.
Sanford, A. J. , & Garrod, S. C. (2005). Memory-based approaches and beyond. Discourse Processes, 39,
205–224.
Sanford, A. J. , Moar, K. , & Garrod, S. C. (1988). Proper names as controllers of discourse focus. Language
and Speech, 31, 43–56.
Savin, H. B. (1972). What the child knows about speech when he starts to learn to read. In J. F. Kavanagh & I.
G. Mattingly (Eds.), Language by ear and by eye. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Scanlon, D. M. , Boudah, D. , Elksnin, L. K. , Gersten, R. , & Klingner, J. (2003). Important publications in the
field of LD in light of imminent topics. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26(3), 215–224.
Scanlon, D. M. , & Vellutino, F. R. (1996). Prerequisite skills, early instruction, and success in first-grade
reading: Selected results from a longitudinal study. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities
Research Reviews, 2 , 54–63.
Scarborough, H. S. (1990). Very early language deficits in dyslexic children. Child Development, 61(6),
1728–1743.
Scarborough, H. S. (1991). Early syntactic development of dyslexic children. Annals of Dyslexia, 41, 207–220.
Scarborough, H. S. , & Dobrich, W. (1994). On the efficacy of reading to preschoolers. Developmental Review,
14 (3), 245–302.
Schank, R. C. , & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding: An inquiry into human
knowledge structures. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Schatschneider, C. , Fletcher, J. M. , Francis, D. J. , Carlson, C. D. , & Foorman, B. R. (2004). Kindergarten
prediction of reading skills: A longitudinal comparative analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96,
265–282.
Schatschneider, C. , Francis, D. J. , Fletcher, J. M. , Foorman, B. R. , & Mehta, P. (1999). The dimensionality of
phonological awareness: An application of item response theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91,
439–449.
Schilling, H. E. H. , Rayner, K. , & Chumbley, J. (1998). Comparing naming, lexical decision, and eye fixation
times: Word frequency effects and individual differences. Memory & Cognition, 26, 1270–1281.
Schindler, R. M. (1978). The effect of prose context on visual search for letters. Memory & Cognition, 6,
124–130.
Schneider, D. , & Phillips, C. (2001). Grammatical search and reanalysis. Journal of Memory and Language,
45, 308–336.
Schneider, W. , & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection,
search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84, 1–66.
Schoonbaert, S. , & Grainger, J. (2004). Letter position coding in printed word perception: effects of repeated
and transposed letters. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 333–367.
Schuberth, R. E. , & Eimas, P. D. (1977). Effects of context on the classification of words and nonwords.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 27–36.
Schultz, R. T. , Cho, N. K. , Staib, L. H. , & Kier, L. E. (1994). Brain morphology in normal and dyslexic children:
The influence of sex and age. Annals of Neurology, 35(6), 732–742.
Schustack, M. W. , Ehrlich, S. F. , & Rayner, K. (1987). The complexity of contextual facilitation in reading:
Local and global influences. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 322–340.
Schütze, C. T. , & Gibson, E. (1999). Argumenthood and English prepositional phrase attachment. Journal of
Memory and Language, 40, 409–431.
Schwantes, F. M. (1981). Effect of story context on children’s ongoing word recognition. Journal of Reading
Behavior, 13, 305–311.
Scott, J. A. , & Ehri, L. C. (1990). Sight word reading in prereaders: Use of logographic vs. alphabetic access
routes. Journal of Reading Behavior, 22(2), 149–166. Retrieved from www.csa.com
Sears, C. R. , Campbell, C. R. , & Lupker, S. J. (2006). Is there a neighborhood frequency effect in English?
Evidence from reading and lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance, 32, 1040–1062.
Segal, D. , & Wolf, M. (1993). Automaticity, word retrieval, and vocabulary development in children with reading
disabilities. In L. J. Meltzer (Ed.), Strategy assessment and instruction for students with learning disabilities:
From theory to practice (pp. 141–165). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Seidenberg, M. S. (1985). Constraining models of word recognition. Cognition, 20, 169–190.
Seidenberg, M. S. (2011). Reading in different writing systems: One architecture, multiple solutions. In P.
McCardle , J. Ren , & O. Tzeng , & B. Miller (Eds.), Dyslexia across languages: Orthography and the
brain—gene–behavior link (pp. 151–168). Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.
Seidenberg, M. S. , & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of visual word recognition
and naming. Psychological Review, 96, 523–568.
Seidenberg, M. S. , & Vidanovic, S. (1985). Word recognition in Serbo-Croatian and English: Do they differ?
Paper presented at Psychonomic Society Meeting, Boston.
Seidenberg, M. S. , Waters, G. S. , Barnes, M. A. , & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1984a). When does irregular spelling
or pronunciation influence word recognition? Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 383–404.
Seidenberg, M. S. , Waters, G. S. , Sanders, M. , & Langer, P. (1984b). Pre- and post-lexical loci of contextual
effects on word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 12, 315–328.
Seigneuric, A. , Ehrlich, M. F. , Oakhill, J. V. , & Yuill, N. M. (2000). Working memory resources and children’s
reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 13, 81–103.
Selkirk, E. (1982). The syntax of words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Selkirk, E. (2003). Sentence phonology. In International encyclopedia of linguistics (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press.
Sénéchal, M. , LeFevre, J. , Thomas, E. M. , & Daley, K. E. (1998). Differential effects of home literacy
experiences on the development of oral and written language. Reading Research Quarterly, 33(1), 96–116.
Sereno, S. C. , O'Donnell, P. J. , & Rayner, K. (2006). Eye movements and lexical ambiguity resolution:
Investigating the subordinate bias effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance, 32 , 335–350.
Sereno, S. C. , & Rayner, K. (1992). Fast priming during eye fixations in reading. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 173–184
Sereno, S. C. , & Rayner, K. (2000). Spelling–sound regularity effects on eye fixations in reading. Perception &
Psychophysics, 62(2), 402–409.
Sereno, S. C. , & Rayner, K. (2003). Measuring word recognition in reading: Eye movements and event-related
potentials. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 489–493.
Sereno, S. C. , Rayner, K. , & Posner, M. I. (1998). Establishing a time-line of word recognition: Evidence from
eye movements and event-related potentials. Neuroreport, 9, 2195–2200.
Seymour, P. H. , Aro, M. , & Erskine, J. M. (2003). Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies.
British Journal of Psychology, 94(2), 143–174.
Seymour, P. H. K. , & Evans, H. M. (1994). Levels of phonological awareness and learning to read. Reading
and Writing, 6(3), 221–250.
Shallice, T. , & Warrington, E. K. (1980). Single and multiple component central dyslexic syndromes. In M.
Coltheart , K. Patterson , & J. C. Marshall (Eds.), Deep dyslexia. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Shankweiler, D. , Liberman, I. Y. , Mark, L. S. , Fowler, C. A. , & Fischer, F. W. (1979). The speech code and
learning to read. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 5, 531–545.
Shankweiler, D. , Lundquist, E. , Katz, L. , Stuebing, K. K. , Fletcher, J. M. , Brady, S. , et al. (1999).
Comprehension and decoding: Patterns of association in children with reading difficulties. Scientific Studies of
Reading, 3(1), 69–94.
Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition,
55 (2), 151–218.
Share, D. L. (1999). Phonological recording and orthographic learning: A direct test of the self-teaching
hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72, 95–129.
Share, D. L. (2008). On the anglocentricities of current reading research and practice: The perils of overreliance
on an outlier orthography. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 584–615.
Share, D. L. , & Gur, T. (1999). How reading begins: A study of preschoolers’ print identification strategies.
Cognition and Instruction, 17(2), 177–213.
Share, D. L. , Jorm, A. F. , Maclean, R. , & Matthews, R. (1984). Sources of individual differences in reading
acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(6), 1309–1324.
Share, D. L. , Jorm, A. F. , Maclean, R. , & Matthews, R. (2002). Temporal processing and reading disability.
Reading and Writing, 15(1–2), 151–178.
Share, D. L. , & Stanovich, K. E. (1995). Cognitive processes in early reading development: A model of
acquisition and individual differences. Issues in Education: Contributions from Educational Psychology, 1, 1–57.
Shaywitz, B. A. , Fletcher, J. M. , Holahan, J. M. , & Shaywitz, S. E. (1992). Discrepancy compared to low
achievement definitions of reading disability: Results from the Connecticut Longitudinal Study. Journal of
Learning Disabilities, 25(10), 639–648.
Shaywitz, B. A. , Holford, T. R. , Holahan, J. M. , & Fletcher, J. M. (1995). A Matthew effect for IQ but not for
reading: Results from a longitudinal study. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), 894–906.
Shaywitz, B. A. , Shaywitz, S. E. , Blachman, B. , Pugh, K. R. , Fulbright, R. K. , Skudlarski, P. , et al. (2004).
Development of left occipito-temporal systems for skilled reading following phonologically based reading
intervention in children. Biological Psychiatry, 55, 926–933.
Shaywitz, B. A. , Shaywitz, S. E. , Pugh, K. R. , Mencl, W. E. , Fulbright, R. K. , Skudlarksi, P. , et al. (2002).
Disruption of posterior brain systems for reading in children with developmental dyslexia. Biological Psychiatry,
52(2), 101–110.
Shaywitz, B. A. , Skudlarksi, P. , Holahan, J. M. , Marchione, K. E. , Constable, R. T. , Fulbright, R. K. , et al.
(2007). Age-related changes in readings systems of dyslexic children. Annals of Neurology, 61(4), 363–370.
Shaywitz, S. E. (1998). Current concepts: Dyslexia. The New England Journal of Medicine, 338(5), 307–312.
Shaywitz, S. E. , Fletcher, J. M. , Holahan, J. M. , Shneider, A. E. , Marchione, K. E. , Stuebing, K. K. , et al.
(1999). Persistence of dyslexia: The Connecticut Longitudinal Study at adolescence. Pediatrics, 104(6),
1351–1359.
Shaywitz, S. E. , & Shaywitz, B. A. (2004). Neurobiologic basis for reading and reading disability. In P.
McCardle & V. Chhabra (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research (pp. 417–442). Baltimore, MD: Paul
Brookes.
Shaywitz, S. E. , & Shaywitz, B. A. (2005). Dyslexia (specific reading disability). Biological Psychiatry, 57(11),
1301–1309.
Shaywitz, S. E. , Shaywitz, B. A. , Fletcher, J. M. , & Escobar, M. D. (1990). Prevalence of reading disability in
boys and girls: Results of the Connecticut Longitudinal Study. Journal of the American Medical Association, 264
(8), 998–1002.
Shen, E. (1927). An analysis of eye movements in the reading of Chinese. Journal of Experimental Psychology,
10, 158–183.
Shiffrin, R. M. , & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual
learning, automatic attending and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127–190.
Siegel, L. S. (1984). A longitudinal study of a hyperlexic child: Hyperlexia as a language disorder.
Neuropsychologia, 22 (5), 577–585.
Siegel, L. S. (1992). An evaluation of the discrepancy definition of dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25,
618–629.
Simos, P. G. , Breier, J. I. , Fletcher, J. M. , Bergman, E. , & Papanicolaou, A. C. (2000). Cerebral mechanisms
involved in word reading in dyslexic children: A magnetic source imaging approach. Cerebral Cortex, 10(8),
809–816.
Singer, M. (1979). Processes of inference in sentence encoding. Memory & Cognition, 7, 192–200.
Singer, M. (2007). Inference processing in discourse comprehension. In M. G. Gaskell (Ed.), The Oxford
handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 343–360). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Singer, M. , & Ferreira, F. (1983). Inferring consequences in story comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning
and Verbal Behavior, 22, 437–448.
Singer, M. , & Halldorson, M. (1996). Constructing and verifying motive bridging inferences. Cognitive
Psychology, 30, 1–38
Slattery, T. J. (2009). Word misperception, the neighbor frequency effect, and the role of sentence context:
Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35,
1969–1975.
Slattery, T. J. , Angele, B. , & Rayner, K. (2011). Eye movements and display change detection during reading.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, in press.
Slattery, T. J. , Pollatsek, A. , & Rayner, K. (2007). The effect of the frequencies of three consecutive content
words on eye movements during reading. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1283–1292.
Slattery, T. J. , & Rayner, K. (2010). The influence of text legibility on eye movements during reading. Applied
Cognitive Psychology, 24, 1129–1148.
Slowiaczek, M. L. , & Clifton, C. Jr. (1980). Subvocalization and reading for meaning. Journal of Verbal
Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 573–582.
Smith, F. (1971). Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read. New York:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Smith, F. (1973). Psycholinguistics and reading. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Smith, F. (2004). Understanding reading (6th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Smith, F. , & Goodman, K. S. (1971). On the psycholinguistic method of teaching reading. Elementary School
Journal , 177–181.
Smith, P. T. , & Groat, A. (1979). Spelling patterns: Letter cancellation and the processing of text. In P. A.
Kolers , M. E. Wrolstad , & H. Bouma (Eds.), Processing of visible language. New York: Plenum.
Smith, F. , Lott, D. , & Cronnell, B. (1969). The effect of type size and case alternation on word identification.
American Journal of Psychology, 82, 248–253.
Snedeker, J. , & Trueswell, J. C. (2004). The developing constraints on parsing decisions: The role of
lexicalbiases and referential scenes in child and adult sentence processing. Cognitive Psychology, 49,
238–299.
Snowling, M. J. (1980). The development of grapheme–phoneme correspondence in normal and dyslexic
children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 29, 294–305.
Snowling, M. J. (2000a). Dyslexia. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Snowling, M. J. (2000b). Language and literacy skills: Who is at risk and why? In D. V. M. Bishop & L. B.
Leonard (Eds.), Speech and language impairments in children: Causes, characteristics, intervention and
outcome (pp. 245–259). New York: Psychology Press.
Snowling, M. J. (2001). From language to reading and dyslexia. Dyslexia, 7, 37–46.
Snowling, M. J. , Bryant, P. E. , & Hulme, C. (1996). Theoretical and methodological pitfalls in making
comparisons between developmental and acquired dyslexia: Some comments on A. Castles & M. Coltheart
(1993). Reading and Writing, 8(5), 443–451.
Snowling, M. J. , & Frith, U. (1986). Comprehension in “hyperlexic” readers. Journal of Experimental Child
Psychology, 42(3), 392–415.
Snowling, M. J. , Gallagher, A. , & Frith, U. (2003). Family risk of dyslexia is continuous: Individual differences
in the precursors of reading skill. Child Development, 74(2), 358–373.
Snowling, M. J. , & Hulme, C. (2005). Learning to read with a language impairment. In M. J. Snowling & C.
Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 397–412). Malden, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Snowling, M. J. , Nation, K. , Moxham, P. , Gallagher, A. , & Frith, U. (1997). Phonological processing skills of
dyslexic students in higher education: A preliminary report. Journal of Research in Reading, 20(1), 31–41.
Sokolov, A. N. (1972). Inner speech and thought. New York: Plenum.
Sparks, R. L. (2001). Phonemic awareness and reading skill in hyperlexic children: A longitudinal study.
Reading and Writing, 14(3–4), 333–360.
Spear-Swerling, L. , & Brucker, P. O. (2003). Teachers’ acquisition of knowledge about English word structure.
Annals of Dyslexia, 53, 72–96.
Speer, O. B. , & Lamb, G. S. (1976). First grade reading ability and fluency in naming verbal symbols. The
Reading Teacher, 29, 572–576.
Speer, S. , & Clifton, C. Jr. (1998). Plausibility and argument structure in sentence comprehension. Memory &
Cognition, 26, 965–979.
Sperling, A. J. , Lu, Z. , Manis, F. R. , & Seidenberg, M. S. (2005). Deficits in perceptual noise exclusion in
developmental dyslexia. Nature Neuroscience, 8(7), 862–863.
Sperling, A. J. , Lu, Z. , Manis, F. R. , & Seidenberg, M. S. (2006). Motion-perception deficits and reading
impairment: It’s the noise, not the motion. Psychological Science, 17(12), 1047–1053.
Sperling, G. (1960). The information available in brief visual presentations. Psychological Monographs, 74 (No.
498).
Sperling, G. (1963). A model for visual memory tasks. Human Factors, 5, 19–31.
Spragins, A. B. , Lefton, L. A. , & Fisher, D. F. (1976). Eye movements while reading and searching spatially
transformed text: A developmental examination. Memory & Cognition, 4, 36–42.
Sprenger-Charolles, L. , & Bonnet, P. (1996). New doubts on the significance of the logographic stage. Current
Psychology of Cognition, 15, 173–208.
Sprenger-Charolles, L. , Colle, P. , Lacert, P. , & Serniclaes, W. (2000). On subtypes of developmental
dyslexia: Evidence from processing time and accuracy scores. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,
54(2), 87–104.
Stahl, S. A. , & Kuhn, M. R. (1995). Does whole language or instruction matched to learning styles help children
learn to read? School Psychology Review, 24(3), 393–404.
Stahl, S. A. , McKenna, M. C. , & Pagnucco, J. R. (1994). The effects of whole-language instruction: An update
and a reappraisal. Educational Psychologist, 29(4), 175–185.
Stanley, G. , Smith, G. A. , & Howell, E. A. (1983). Eye movements and sequential tracking in dyslexic and
control children. British Journal of Psychology, 74, 181–187.
Stanovich, K. E. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the
development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 32–71.
Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the
acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 4, 360–406.
Stanovich, K. E. (1988). Explaining the differences between the dyslexic and the garden-variety poor reader:
The phonological-core variable-difference model. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(10), 590–604 , 612.
Stanovich, K. E. (1992). Developmental reading disorder. In S. R. Hooper , G. W. Hynd , & R. E. Mattison
(Eds.), Developmental disorders: Diagnostic criteria and clinical assessment (pp. 173–208). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Stanovich, K. E. (2005). The future of a mistake: Will discrepancy measurement continue to make the learning
disabilities field a pseudoscience? Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(2), 103–106.
Stanovich, K. E. , Cunningham, A. E. , & Cramer, B. (1984). Assessing phonological awareness in kindergarten
children: Issues of task comparability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 38, 175–190.
Stanovich, K. E. , & Siegel, L. S. (1994). Phenotypic performance profile of children with reading disabilities: A
regression-based test of the phonological-core variable-difference model. Journal of Educational Psychology,
86 (1), 24–53.
Stanovich, K. E. , Siegel, L. S. , & Gottardo, A. (1997). Converging evidence for phonological and surface
subtypes of reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(1), 114–127.
Stanovich, K. E. , Siegel, L. S. , Gottardo, A. , Chiappe, P. , & Sidhu, R. (1997). Subtypes of developmental
dyslexia: Differences in phonological and orthographic coding. In B. A. Blachman (Ed.), Foundations of reading
acquisition and dyslexia: Implications for early intervention (pp. 115–141). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Stanovich, K. E. , & West, R. F. (1979). Mechanisms of sentence context effects in reading: Automatic
activation and conscious attention. Memory & Cognition, 7, 77–85.
Stanovich, K. E. , & West, R. F. (1983). On priming by a sentence context. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
General, 112, 1–36.
Stanovich, K. E. , & West, R. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research
Quarterly, 24(4), 402–433.
Stanovich, K. E. , West, R. F. , & Freeman, D. J. (1981). A longitudinal study of sentence context effects on
second-grade children: Tests of an interactive-compensatory model. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,
32 , 185–199.
Staub, A. (2007a). The parser doesn’t ignore intransitivity, after all. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 550–569.
Staub, A. (2007b). The return of the repressed: Abandoned parses facilitate syntactic reanalysis. Journal of
Memory and Language, 57, 299–323.
Staub, A. , Clifton, C. Jr. , & Frazier, L. (2006). Heavy NP shift is the parser’s last resort: Evidence from eye
movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 389–406.
Stein, J. (2001). The sensory basis of reading problems. Developmental Neuropsychology, 20(2), 509–534.
Stein, J. F. , & Fowler, S. (1982). Ocular motor dyslexia. Dyslexia Review, 5, 25–28.
Stein, J. F. , & Fowler, S. (1984). Ocular motor problems of learning to read. In A. G. Gale & F. Johnson (Eds.),
Theoretical and applied aspects of eye movement research. Amsterdam: North Holland Press.
Stein, N. L. , & Glenn, C. G. (1979). An analysis of story comprehension in elementary school children. In P. O.
Freedle (Ed.), New directions in discourse processing. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Stephenson, K. , Parrila, R. , Georgiou, G. , & Kirby, R. (2008). Effects of home literacy, parents’ beliefs, and
children’s task-focused behaviour on emergent literacy and word reading skills. Scientific Studies of Reading,
12 , 24–50.
Stern, J. A. (1978). Eye movements, reading, and cognition. In J. W. Senders , D. F. Fisher , & R. A. Monty ,
(Eds.), Eye movements and higher psychological functions (Vol. 2). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Inc.
Sternberg, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donder’s method. In W. G. Koster
(Ed.), Attention and performance II. Acta Psychologica, 30, 276–315.
Sternberg, S. , Monsell, S. , Knoll, R. L. , & Wright, C. E. (1978). The latency and duration of rapid movement
sequences: Comparison of speech and typerwriting. In G. E. Stelmach (Ed.), Information processing in motor
control and learning (pp. 117–152). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Stevenson, H. W. , Parker, T. , Wilkinson, A. , Hegion, A. , & Fish, E. (1976). Longitudinal study of individual
differences in cognitive development and scholastic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68,
377–400.
Sticht, T. G. , & James, J. H. (1984). Listening and reading. In P. D. Pearson , R. Barr , M. L. Kamil , & P.
Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research:Volume I (pp. 293–317). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Storch, S. A. , & Whitehurst, G. J. (2002). Oral language and code-related precursors to reading: Evidence from
a longitudinal structural model. Developmental Psychology, 38, 934–947.
Stowe, L. (1986). Parsing wh-constructions: Evidence for on-line gap location. Language and Cognitive
Processes, 1 , 227–246.
Stringer, R. , & Stanovich, K. E. (2000). The connection between reaction time and variation in reading ability:
Unraveling covariance relationships with cognitive ability and phonological sensitivity. Scientific Studies of
Reading, 4(1), 41–53.
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18,
643–662
Stuart, M. , & Coltheart, M. (1988). Does reading develop in a sequence of stages? Cognition, 30(2), 139–181.
Stuebing, K. K. , Fletcher, J. M. , LeDoux, J. M. , Lyon, G. R. , Shaywitz, S. E. , & Shaywitz, B. A.
(2002).Validity of IQ-discrepancy classifications of reading disabilities: A meta-analysis. American Educational
Research Journal, 39(2), 469–518.
Sturt, P. (2007). Semantic re-interpretation and garden path recovery. Cognition, 105, 477–488.
Sturt, P. , Pickering, M. J. , Scheepers, C. , & Crocker, M. W. (2001). The preservation of structure in language
comprehension: Is reanalysis the last resort? Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 283–307.
Sturt, P. , Sanford, A. , Stewart, A. , & Dawydiak, E. J. (2004). Linguistic focus and good-enough
representations: An application of the change-detection paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11,
882–888.
Suh, S. , & Trabasso, T. (1993). Inferences during reading: Converging evidence from discourse analysis, talk-
aloud protocols, and recognition priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 279–300.
Sun, F. , Morita, M. , & Stark, L. W. (1985). Comparative patterns of reading eye movement in Chinese and
English. Perception & Psychophysics, 37, 502–506.
Swan, D. , & Goswami, U. (1997). Phonological awareness deficits in developmental dyslexia and the
phonological representations hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 66(1), 18–41.
Swets, B. , DeSmet, T. , Clifton, C. Jr. , & Ferreira, F. (2008). Underspecification of syntactic ambiguities:
Evidence from self–paced reading. Memory & Cognition, 36, 201–217.
Swinney, D. (1982). The structure and time course of information during speech comprehension: Lexical
segmentation, access, and interpretation. In J. Mehler , E. Walker , & M. Garrett (Eds.), Perspectives on mental
representation: Experimental and theoretical studies of cognitive processes and capacities (pp. 151–167).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Tabor, W. , Galantucci, B. , & Richardson, D. (2004). Effects of merely local syntactic coherence on sentence
processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 355–370.
Taft, M. (1979). Lexical access via an othographic code: The Basic Orthographic Syllable Structure (BOSS).
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 21–39.
Taft, M. (1981). Prefix stripping revisited. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 284–297.
Taft, M. (1985). The decoding of words in lexical access: A review of the morphological approach. In D. Besner
, T. G. Waller , & G. E. MacKinnon , (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice (Vol. 5). New
York: Academic Press.
Taft, M. (1986). Lexical access codes in visual and auditory word recognition. Language and Cognitive
Processes, 4 , 297–308.
Taft, M. (2006). A localist-cum-distributed (LCD) framework for lexical processing. In S. M. Andrews (Ed.), From
inkmarks to ideas: Current issues in lexical processing. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Taft, M. , & Forster, K. I. (1975). Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and
Verbal Behavior, 14, 638–647.
Taft, M. , & Forster, K. I. (1976). Lexical storage and retrieval of polymorphemic and polysyllabic words. Journal
of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 607–620.
Tallal, P. (1980a). Auditory temporal perception, phonics, and reading disabilities in children. Brain and
Language, 9, 182–198.
Tallal, P. (1980b). Language disabilities in children: A perceptual or linguistic deficit? Journal of Pediatric
Psychology, 5(2), 127–140
Tanenhaus, M. , & Trueswell, J. C. (2006). Eye movements and spoken language comprehension. In M. J.
Traxler & M. A. Gernsbacher (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics ( 2nd ed., pp. 863–900). London: Academic
Press.
Tangel, D. M. , & Blachman, B. A. (1992). Effect of phoneme awareness instruction on kindergarten children’s
invented spelling. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24(2), 233–261.
Tarkiainen, A. , Helenius, P. , Hansen, P. C. , Cornelissen, P. L. , & Salmelin, R. (1999). Dynamics of letter
string perception in the human occipitotemporal cortex. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 122(11), 2119–2132.
Taylor, I. (1981). Writing systems and reading. In G. E. MacKinnon & T. G. Waller , (Eds.), Reading research:
Advances in theory and practice (Vol. 2). New York: Academic Press.
Taylor, I. , & Taylor, M. M. (1983). The psychology of reading. New York: Academic Press.
Taylor, S. E. (1962). An evaluation of forty-one trainees who had recently completed the “Reading Dynamics”
program. In E. P. Bliesmer & R. C. Staiger (Eds.), Problems, programs, and projects in college adult reading.
Eleventh yearbook of the National Reading Conference. Milwaukee, WI: National Reading Conference.
Taylor, S. E. (1965). Eye movements while reading: Facts and fallacies. American Educational Research
Journal, 2, 187–202.
Temple, C. M. , & Carney, R. (1996). Reading skills in children with Turner’s syndrome: An analysis of
hyperlexia. Cortex, 32(2), 335–345.
Temple, E. , Deutsch, G. K. , Poldrack, R. A. , Miller, S. L. , Tallal, P. , Merzenich, M. M. , et al. (2003). Neural
deficits in children with dyslexia ameliorated by behavioral remediation: Evidence from functional MRI.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(5), 2860–2865.
Thorndyke, P. W. (1977). Cognitive structures in comprehension and memory of narrative discourse. Cognitive
Psychology, 9, 135–147.
Tinker, M. A. (1939). Reliability and validity of eye-movement measures of reading. Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 19, 732–746.
Tinker, M. A. (1955). Perceptual and oculomotor efficiency in reading materials in vertical and horizontal
arrangement. American Journal of Psychology, 68, 444–449.
Tinker, M. A. (1958). Recent studies of eye movements in reading. Psychological Bulletin, 55, 215–231.
Tinker, M. A. (1963). Legibility of print. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
Tinker, M. A. (1965). Bases for effective reading. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Torgesen, J. K. (2004). Lessons learned from research on interventions for students who have difficulty
learning to read. In P. McCardle & V. Chhabra (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research (pp. 355–382).
Baltimore, MD : Paul Brookes.
Torgesen, J. K. , Alexander, A. W. , Wagner, R. K. , Rashotte, C. A. , Voeller, K. K. S. , & Conway, T. (2001).
Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes
from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(1), 33–58.
Torgesen, J. K. , & Hudson, R. (2006). Reading fluency: Critical issues for struggling readers. In S. J. Samuels
& A. Farstrup (Eds.), Reading fluency: The forgotten dimension of reading success. Newark, DE: International
Reading Association Monograph of the British Journal of Educational Psychology.
Torgesen, J. K. , Rashotte, C. A. , & Alexander, A. (2001). Principles of fluency instruction in reading:
Relationships with established empirical outcomes. In M. Wolf (Ed.), Dyslexia, fluency, and the brain (pp.
333–355). Timonium, MD: York Press.
Torgesen, J. K. , Wagner, R. K. , & Rashotte, C. A. (1994). Longitudinal studies of phonological processing and
reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27(5), 276–286.
Torgesen, J. K. , Wagner, R. K. , Rashotte, C. A. , Burgess, S. , & Hecht, S. (1997). Contributions of
phonological awareness and rapid automatic naming ability to the growth of word-reading skills in second- to
fifth-grade children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1(2), 161–185.
Torgesen, J. K. , Wagner, R. K. , Rashotte, C. A. , Rose, E. , Lindamood, P. , Conway, T. , et al. (1999).
Preventing reading failure in young children with phonological processing disabilities: Group and individual
responses to instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 579–593.
Torneus, M. (1984). Phonological awareness and reading: A chicken and egg problem? Journal of Educational
Psychology, 76, 1346–1348.
Townsend, D. J. (1978). Interclause relations and clausal processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal
Behavior, 17 , 509–521.
Townsend, D. T. , & Bever, T. (1982). Natural units of representation interact during sentence comprehension.
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 688–703.
Townsend, D. J. , & Bever, T. (2001). Sentence comprehension: The integration of habits and rules.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Townsend, J. (1976). Serial and within-stage independent parallel model equivalence on the minimum
completion time. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 14, 219–238.
Transler, C. , Gombert, J. E. , & Leybaert, J. (2001). Phonological decoding in severely and profoundly deaf
children: Similarity judgment between written pseudowords. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 61–82.
Transler, C. , & Reitsma, P. (2005). Phonological coding in reading of deaf children: Pseudohomophone effects
in lexical decision. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 23, 525–542.
Traxler, M. J. (2007). Working memory contributions to relative clause attachment processing: A hierarchical
linear modeling analysis. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1107–1121.
Traxler, M. J. , & Gernsbacher, M. A. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of psycholinguistics (2nd ed.). Amsterdam:
Elsevier.
Traxler, M. J. , Long, D. L. , Johns, C. L. , Tooley, K. M. , Zirnsein, M. , & Jonathan, E. (in press). Modeling
individual differences in eye-movements during reading: Working memory and speed-of-processing effects.
Journal of Eye Movement Research.
Traxler, M. J. , Pickering, M. , & Clifton, C. Jr. (1998). Adjunct attachment is not a form of lexical ambiguity
resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 558–592.
Traxler, M. J. , Pickering, M. J. , & McElree, B. (2002). Coercion in sentence processing: Evidence from eye
movements and self-paced reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 47, 530–548.
Traxler, M. J. , Williams, R. S. , Blozis, S. A. , & Morris, R. K. (2005). Working memory, animacy, and verb class
in the processing of relative clauses. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 204–224.
Treiman, R. A. (1984). Individual differences among children in reading and spelling styles. Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 37, 463–477.
Treiman, R. A. , & Baron, J. (1983a). Phonemic analysis training helps children benefit from spelling–sound
rules. Memory & Cognition, 11, 382–389.
Treiman, R. A. , & Baron, J. (1983b). Individual differences in spelling: The Phoenician–Chinese distinction.
Topics in Learning & Learning Disabilities, 3(3), 33–40.
Treiman, R. A. , Baron, J. , & Luk, K. (1981). Speech recoding in silent reading: A comparison of Chinese and
English. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 9, 116–124.
Treiman, R. A. , Freyd, J. J. , & Baron, J. (1983). Phonological recoding and use of spelling sound rules in
reading of sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 682–700.
Treiman, R. A. , & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (1983). Silent reading: Insights from second-generation deaf readers.
Cognitive Psychology, 15, 39–65.
Treiman, R. A. , Kessler, B. , & Bick, S. (2003). Influence of consonantal context on the pronunciation of
vowels: A comparison of human readers and computational models. Cognition, 88(1), 49–78.
Treiman, R. A. , Kessler, B. , Zevin, J. D. , Bick, S. , & Davis, M. (2006). Influence of consonantal context on the
reading of vowels: Evidence from children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 93(1), 1–24.
Treiman, R. A. , Mullennix, J. , Bijeljac-Babic, R. , & Richmond-Welty, E. D. (1995). The special role of rimes in
the description, use, and acquisition of English orthography. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124
, 107–136.
Treiman, R. A. , & Rodriguez, K. (1999).Young children use letter names in learning to read words.
Psychological Science, 10(4), 334–338.
Treisman, A. (1988). Features and objects: The 14th Bartlett Memorial Lecture. Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 40A, 201–237.
Treisman, A. , & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97–136.
Trueswell, J. C. (1996). The role of lexical frequency in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and
Language, 35, 566–585.
Trueswell, J. C. , & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1994). Toward a lexicalist framework of constraint-based syntactic
ambiguity resolution. In C. Clifton , K. Rayner , & L. Frazier (Eds.), Perspectives on sentence processing (pp.
155–179). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Trueswell, J. C. , Tanenhaus, M. K. , & Garnsey, S. M. (1994). Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic
role information in syntactic disambiguation. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 285–318.
Trueswell, J. C. , Tanenhaus, M. K. , & Kello, C. (1993). Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing:
Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and Cognition, 19, 528–553.
Tsai, J. , Lee, C. , Tzeng, O. J. L. , Hung, D. L. , & Yen, N. (2004). Use of phonological codes for Chinese
characters: Evidence from processing of parafoveal preview when reading sentences. Brain and Language, 91,
235–244.
Tulving, E. (1972). Episodic and semantic memory. In E. Tulving & W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization and
memory. New York: Academic Press.
Tulving, E. , & Gold, C. (1963). Stimulus information and contextual information as determinants of
tachistoscopic recognition of words. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 319–327.
Tulving, E. , Mandler, G. , & Baumal, R. (1964). Interaction of two sources of information in tachistoscopic word
recognition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 18, 62–71.
Tunmer, W. E. , Herriman, M. L. , & Nesdale, A. R. (1988). Metalinguistic abilities and beginning reading.
Reading Research Quarterly, 23(2), 134–158.
Turvey, M. T. (1977). Contrasting orientations to a theory of visual information processing. Psychological
Review, 84, 67–88.
Turvey, M. T. , Feldman, L. B. , & Lukatela, G. (1984). The Serbo-Croatian orthography constrains the reader to
a phonologically analytic strategy. In L. Henderson (Ed.), Orthographies and reading. Hove, UK: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
Tzeng, O. J. L. , & Hung, D. L. (1980). Reading in a nonalphabetic writing system. In J. G. Kavanagh & R. L.
Venezky (Eds.), Orthography, reading and dyslexia. Baltimore: University Park Press.
Tzeng, O. J. L. , Hung, D. L. , & Wang W. S-Y. (1977). Speech recoding in reading Chinese characters. Journal
of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 3, 621–630.
Underwood, G. (1980). Attention and the non-selective lexical access of ambiguous words. Canadian Journal of
Psychology, 34, 72–76.
Underwood, G. (1981). Lexical recognition of embedded unattended words: Some implictions for reading
processes. Acta Psychologica, 47, 267–283.
Underwood, N. R. , & McConkie, G. W. (1985). Perceptual span for letter distinctions during reading. Reading
Research Quarterly, 20, 153–162.
Underwood, N. R. , & Zola, D. (1986). The span of letter recognition of good and poor readers. Reading
Research Quarterly, 21, 6–19.
Ungerleider, L. G. , Doyon, J. , & Karni, A. (2002). Imaging brain plasticity during motor skill learning.
Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 78(3), 553–564.
Unsworth, S. J. , & Pexman, P. M. (2003). The impact of reader skill on phonological processing in visual word
recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 56,
63–81.
Uttal, W. R. , & Smith, P. (1968). Recognition of alphabetic characters during voluntary eye movement.
Perception & Psychophysics, 3, 257–264.
Vaessen, A. , Bertrand, D. , Tóth, D. , Csépe, V. , Faisca, L. , Reis, A. , et al. (2010). Cognitive development of
fluent word reading does not qualitatively differ between transparent and opaque orthographies. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 102(4), 827–842.
Vallduvi, E. , & Engdahl, E. (1996). The linguistic realization of information packaging. Linguistics, 34, 459–519.
Van den Bussche, E. , Van den Noortgate W. , & Reynvoet, B. (2009). Mechanisms of masked priming: A
meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 452–477.
van Dijk, T. A. , & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
van Gompel, R. P. G. , & Pickering, M. (2007). Sentence parsing. In G. Gaskell (Ed.), Oxford handbook of
psycholinguistics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
van Gompel, R. P. G. , Pickering, M. , Pearson, J. , & Liversedge, S. P. (2005). Evidence against competition
during syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 284–307.
Van Orden, G. C. (1987). A rows is a rose: Spelling, sound, and reading. Memory & Cognition, 15, 181–198.
Van Orden, G. C. , Johnston, J. C. , & Hale, B. L. (1987). Word identification in reading proceeds from spelling
to sound to meaning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 371–386.
Van Petten, C. , & Kutas, M. (1987). Ambiguous words in context: An event-related potential analysis of the
time course of meaning activation. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 188–208.
Velan, H. , & Frost, R. (2009). Letter-transposition effects are not universal: The impact of transposing letters in
Hebrew. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 285–302.
Vellutino, F. R. (1979). The validity of perceptual deficit explanations of reading disability: A reply to Fletcher
and Katz. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 12(3), 160–167.
Vellutino, F. R. , & Fletcher, J. M. (2005). Developmental dyslexia. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The
science of reading: A handbook (pp. 362–378). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Vellutino, F. R. , Fletcher, J. M. , Snowling, M. J. , & Scanlon, D. M. (2004). Specific reading disability
(dyslexia): What have we learned in the past four decades? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45,
2–40.
Vellutino, F. R. , & Scanlon, D. M. (1987). Phonological coding, phonological awareness, and reading ability:
Evidence from longitudinal and experimental study. Merrill Palmer Quarterly, 33, 321–363.
Vellutino, F. R. , & Scanlon, D. M. (1991). The effects of instructional bias on word identification. In I. L. Rieben
& C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Learning to read: Basic research and its implications (pp. 189–204). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Vellutino, F. R. , Scanlon, D. M. , Sipay, E. R. , Small, S. G. , Pratt, A. , Chen, R. , et al. (1996). Cognitive
profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for
distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 601–638.
Vellutino, F. R. , Scanlon, D. M. , & Spearing, D. (1995). Semantic and phonological coding in poor and normal
readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 59, 76–123.
Vellutino, F. R. , Scanlon, D. M. , & Tanzman, M. S. (1994). Components of reading ability: Issues and
problems in operationalizing word identification, phonological coding, and orthographic coding. In G. R. Lyon
(Ed.), Frames of reference for the assessment of learning disabilities: New views on measurement issues (pp.
279–332). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes.
Venezky, R. L. , & Massaro, D. W. (1979). The role of orthographic regularity in word recognition. In L. Resnick
& P. Weaver (Eds.), Theory and practice of early reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Vitu, F. , McConkie, G. W. , Kerr, P. , & O'Regan, J. K. (2001). Fixation location effects on fixation durations
during reading: An inverted optimal viewing position effect. Vision Research, 41, 3513–3533.
von Plessen, K. , Lundervold, A. , Duta, N. , Heiervang, E. , Klauschen, F. , Smievoll, A. I. , et al. (2002). Less
developed corpus callosum in dyslexic subjects: A structural MRI study. Neuropsychologia, 40(7), 1035–1044.
Vonk, W. (1984). Eye movements during comprehension of pronouns. In A. G. Gale & F. Johnson (Eds.),
Theoretical and applied aspects of eye movement research. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Vurpoillot, E. (1968). The development of scanning strategies and their relation to visual differentiation. Journal
of Experimental Child Psychology, 6, 632–650.
Wagner, R. K. , & Torgesen, J. K. (1987). The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the
acquisition of reading skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 192–212.
Wagner, R. K. , Torgesen, J. K. , & Rashotte, C. A. (1994). Development of reading-related phonological
processing abilities: New evidence of bidirectional causality from a latent variable longitudinal study.
Developmental Psychology, 30, 73–87.
Wagner, R. K. , Torgesen, J. K. , Rashotte, C. A. , Hecht, S. A. , Barker, T. A. , Burgess, S. R. , et al. (1997).
Changing relations between phonological processing abilities and word-level reading as children develop from
beginning to skilled readers: A 5-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 33(3), 468–479.
Walker, R. Y. (1938). A qualitative study of the eye movements of good readers. American Journal of
Psychology, 51 , 472–481.
Walley, A. C. (1993). The role of vocabulary development in children’s spoken word recognition and
segmentation ability. Developmental Review. Special Issue: Phonological Processes and Learning Disability,
13(3), 286–350.
Walther, M. , Frazier, L. , Clifton, C. Jr. , Hemforth, B. , Konieczny, L. , & Seelig, H. (1999). Prosodic and
syntactic effects on relative clause attachments in German and English. Poster presented at AMLaP 99,
Edinburgh, Scotland , September.
Walton, H. N. (1957).Vision and rapid reading. American Journal of Optometry and Archives of American
Academy of Optometry, 34, 73–82.
Walton, P. D. (1995). Rhyming ability, phoneme identity, letter–sound knowledge, and the use of orthographic
analogy by prereaders. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 587–597.
Wang, F. C. (1935). An experimental study of eye movements in the reading of Chinese. Elementary School
Journal, 35, 527–539.
Wang, Y. , Sereno, J. A. , Jongman, A. , & Hirsch, J. (2003). fMRI evidence for cortical modification during
learning of mandarin lexical tone. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15(7), 1019–1027.
Warren, S. , & Morris, R. K. (2009). Phonological similarity effects in reading. Paper presented at the European
Conference on Eye Movements, Southampton, UK, August.
Warren, T. , & McConnell, K. (2007). Investigating effects of selectional restriction violations and plausibility
violation severity on eye-movements in reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 770–775.
Warren, T. , McConnell, K. , & Rayner, K. (2008). Effects of context on eye movements when reading about
possible and impossible events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 34,
1001–1007.
Wason, P. C. (1965). The contexts of plausible denial. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 4,
7–11.
Waters, G. , & Caplan, D. (1999). Working memory and sentence comprehension. Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, 22 , 77–126.
Waters, G. S. , Komoda, M. K. , & Arbuckle, T. Y. (1985). The effects of concurrent tasks on reading:
Implications for phonological recoding. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 27–45.
Waters, G. S. , Seidenberg, M. S. , & Bruck, M. (1984). Children’s and adult’s use of spelling–sound information
in three reading tasks. Memory & Cognition, 12, 293–305.
Weaver, C. (1994). Reconceptualizing reading and dyslexia. Journal of Childhood Communication Disorders,
16, 23–35
Weber, R. (1970). A linguiistic analysis of first grade reading errors. Reading Research Quarterly, 5, 427–451.
Weekes, B. S. (1997). Differential effects of number of letters on word and nonword naming latency. Quarterly
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50A(2), 439–456.
Wheat, K. L. , Cornelissen, P. L. , Frost, S. J. , & Hansen, P. C. (2010). During visual word recognition,
phonology is accessed within 100 ms and may be mediated by a speech production code: Evidence from
magnetoencephalography. Journal of Neuroscience, 30, 5229–5233.
Wheeler, D. D. (1970). Processes in word recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 1, 59–85.
White, S. , Milne, E. , Rosen, S. , Hansen, P. , Swettenham, J. , Frith, U. , & Ramus, F. (2006). The role of
sensorimotor impairments in dyslexia: A multiple case study of dyslexic children. Developmental Science, 9 (3),
237–255.
White, S. J. , Rayner, K. , & Liversedge, S. P. (2005a). Eye movements and the modulation of parafoveal
processing by foveal processing difficulty. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 891–896.
White, S. J. , Rayner, K. , & Liversedge, S. P. (2005b). The influence of parafoveal word length and contextual
constraint on fixation durations and word skipping in reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 466–471.
Whitehouse, D. , & Harris, J. C. (1984). Hyperlexia in infantile autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders, 14(3), 281–289.
Whitehurst, G. J. , & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child Development, 69,
848–872.
Whitney, C. (2001). How the brain encodes the order of letters in a printed word: The SERIOL model and
selective literature review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 221–243.
Whitney, C. , & Cornelissen, P. (2008). SERIOL reading. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 143–164.
Wiley, J. , & Myers, J. (2002). Availability and accessibility of causal inferences from scientific text. Discourse
Processes, 36, 109–129.
Williams, C. C. , Perea, M. , Pollatsek, A. , & Rayner, K. (2006). Previewing the neighborhood: The role of
orthographic neighbors as parafoveal previews in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception and Performance, 32, 1072–1082.
Williams, J. P. (1979). Reading instruction today. American Psychologist, 34, 917–922.
Williams, J. P. (1980). Teaching decoding with an emphasis on phoneme analysis and phoneme blending.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 1–15.
Williams, J. P. , Blumberg, E. L. , & Williams, D. V. (1970). Cues used in visual word recognition. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 61, 310–315.
Williams, J. P. , Taylor, M. B. , & DeCani, J. S. (1984). Constructing macrostructure for expository text. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 76, 1065–1075.
Williams, R. S. , & Morris, R. K. (2004). Eye movements, word familiarity, and vocabulary acquisition. European
Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16, 312–339.
Willows, D. M. , Borwick, D. , & Hayvren, M. (1981). The content of school readers. In G. E. MacKinnon & T. G.
Waller , (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice (Vol. 2). New York: Academic Press.
Wimmer, H. , & Goswami, U. (1994). The influence of orthographic consistency on reading development: Word
recognition in English and German children. Cognition, 51(1), 91–103.
Wimmer, H. , & Hummer, P. (1990). How German-speaking first graders read and spell: Doubts on the
importance of the logographic stage. Applied Psycholinguistics, 11(4), 349–368.
Wimmer, H. , & Mayringer, H. (2001). Is the reading-rate problem of German dyslexic children caused by slow
visual processes? In M. Wolf (Ed.), Dyslexia, fluency, and the brain (pp. 333–355). Parkton, MD:York Press.
Wimmer, H. , & Mayringer, H. (2002). Dysfluent reading in the absence of spelling difficulties: A specific
disability in regular orthographies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 272–277.
Wimmer, H. , Mayringer, H. , & Landerl, K. (2000). The double-deficit hypothesis and difficulties in learning to
read a regular orthography. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 668–680.
Wise, B. W. , Ring, J. , & Olson, R. K. (1999). Training phonological awareness with and without explicit
attention to articulation. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72, 271–304.
Witton, C. , Talcott, J. B. , Hansen, P. C. , Richardson, A. J. , Griffiths, T. D. , Rees, A. , et al. (1998). Sensitivity
to dynamic auditory and visual stimuli predicts nonword reading ability in both dyslexic and normal readers.
Current Biology, 8, 791–797.
Wittrock, M. C. , Marks, C. , & Doctorow, M. (1975). Reading as a generative process. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 67, 484–489.
Wolf, M. , & Bowers, P. G. (1999). The double-deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 91(3), 415–438.
Wolf, M. , Bowers, P. G. , & Biddle, K. (2000). Naming-speed processes, timing, and reading: A conceptual
review. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(4), 387–407.
Wolf, M. , & Obregón, M. (1992). Early naming deficits, developmental dyslexia, and a specific
deficithypothesis. Brain and Language, 42(3), 219–247.
Wolverton, G. S. , & Zola, D. (1983). The temporal characteristics of visual information extraction during
reading. In K. Rayner (Ed.), Eye movements in reading: Perceptual and language processes. New York:
Academic Press.
Wood, F. B. , & Felton, R. H. (1994). Separate linguistic and attentional factors in the development of reading.
Topics in Language Disorders [Special Issue: ADD and its Relationship to Spoken and Written Language},
14(4), 42–57.
Woodworth, R. S. (1938). Experimental psychology. New York: Holt.
Yaden, D. B. , Smolkin, L. B. , & Conlon, A. (1989). Preschoolers’ questions about pictures, print conventions,
and story text during reading aloud at home. Reading Research Quarterly, 24(2),188–214.
Yan, M. , Kliegl, R. , Richter, E. M. , Nuthmann, A. , & Shu, H. (2010). Flexible saccade-target selection in
Chinese reading. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 705–725.
Yan, M. , Richter, E. M. , Shu, H. , & Kliegl, R. (2009). Readers of Chinese extract semantic information from
parafoveal words. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 561–566.
Yang, J. , Wang, S. , Tong, X. , & Rayner, K. (2011). Semantic and plausibility effects on preview benefit during
eye fixations in Chinese reading. Reading and Writing, in press.
Yang, J. , Wang, S. , Xu, Y. , & Rayner, K. (2009). Do Chinese readers obtain preview benefit from word n+2?
Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Peformance, 35,
1192–1204.
Yekovich, F. R. , & Walker, C. H. (1978). Identifying and using referents in sentence comprehension. Journal of
Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 265–277.
Yeni-Komshian, G. H. , Isenberg, D. , & Goldberg, H. (1975). Cerebral dominance and reading disability: Left
visual field deficit in poor readers. Neuropsychologia, 13, 83–94.
Yik, W. F. (1978). The effect of visual and acoustic similarity on short-term memory for Chinese words.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 30, 487–494.
Yuill, N. , & Oakhill, J. (1991). Children’s problems in text comprehension: An experimental investigation. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Yuill, N. , Oakhill, J. , & Parkin, A. J. (1989). Working memory, comprehension ability and the resolution of text
anomaly. British Journal of Psychology, 80(3), 351–361.
Yule, W. (1973). Differential prognosis of reading backwardness and specific reading retardation. British
Journal of Educational Psychology, 43, 244–248.
Yule, W. , Rutter, M. , Berger, M. , & Thompson, J. (1974). Over and under achievement in reading: Distribution
in the general population. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 44, 1–12.
Zangwill, O. L. , & Blakemore, C. (1972). Dyslexia: Reversal of eye movements during reading.
Neuropsychologia, 10 , 371–373.
Zechmeister, E. B. , & McKillip, J. (1972). Recall of place on the page. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63,
446–453.
Zetzsche, T. , Meisenzahl, E. M. , Preuss, U. W. , Holder, J. J. , Kathmann, N. , Leinsinger, G. , et al. (2001). In-
vivo analysis of the human planum temporale (PT): Does the definition of PT borders influence the results with
regard to cerebral asymmetry and correlation with handedness? Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging, 107 (2),
99–115.
Ziegler, J. C. , & Goswami, U. (2005). Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilled reading across
languages: A psycholinguistic grain size theory. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 3–29.
Ziegler, J. C. , Pech-Georgel, C. , George, F. , & Lorenzi, C. (2009). Speech-perception-in-noise deficits in
dyslexia. Developmental Science, 12(5), 732–745.
Ziegler, J. C. , Stone, G. O. , & Jacobs, A. M. (1997). What’s the pronunciation for _OUGH and the spelling for
/u/? A database for computing feedforward and feedback inconsistency in English. Behavior Research
Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 29, 600–618.
Zifcak, M. (1981). Phonological awareness and reading acquisition. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 6,
117–126
Zola, D. (1984). Redundancy and word perception during reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 36, 277–284.
Zwaan, R. A. (1996). Processing narrative time shifts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory,
and Cognition, 22, 1196–1207.
Zwaan, R. A. , & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory.
Psychological Bulletin, 123(2), 162–185.