Table 1
Example stimulus item with three conditions in Experiment 1.
| Giovanni De Luca owns an independent Italian coffee shop that proves very popular in Didsbury. Entrepreneur Alexander J. Jones wants to invest in Giovanni’s coffee and asks him his coffee-making secret. | |
| DS | Giovanni laughs and explains, “You can only make a proper cup of coffee from a proper copper coffee pot.” |
| IS | Giovanni laughs and explains that one can only make a proper cup of coffee from a proper copper coffee pot. |
| NS | Giovanni laughs and shows him that one can only make a proper cup of coffee from a proper copper coffee pot. |
| The entrepreneur realises that he needs more cash to invest in these copper coffee pots. | |
[i] DS = direct speech;
IS = indirect speech;
NS = non-speech.
Table 2
Mean first-pass reading times and SDs (in ms) across experimental conditions in Experiment 1.
| REPORTING STYLE | N | MEAN FPRT | SD |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct Speech | 407 | 2079 | 1290 |
| Indirect Speech | 404 | 1859 | 1241 |
| Non-Speech | 404 | 1867 | 1230 |
[i] N = no. of observations;
fpRT = first-pass reading time;
SD = standard deviation.
Table 3
Generalised linear mixed-effect model estimates of first-pass reading times for Experiment 1.
| FIXED EFFECTS | B | S.E. | T | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 2031 | 14.1 | 143.9 | <.001 |
| IS – DS | –166 | 20.2 | –8.2 | <.001 |
| NS – DS | –156 | 14.6 | –10.7 | <.001 |
[i] DS = Direct Speech;
IS = Indirect Speech;
NS = Non-Speech.
P-values were calculated using Satterthwaite approximations (lmerTest package).
Figure 1
Model-estimated effects of Reporting Style on first-pass reading times in Experiment 1. The error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.
Table 4
Mean first-pass oral reading times and SDs (in ms) across experimental conditions in Experiment 2.
| REPORTING STYLE | N | MEAN FPRT | SD |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct Speech | 191 | 3074 | 1159 |
| Indirect Speech | 192 | 3214 | 1331 |
| Non-Speech | 192 | 3095 | 972 |
[i] N = no. of observations;
fpRT = first-pass reading time;
SD = standard deviation.
Table 5
Generalised linear mixed-effect model estimates of first-pass oral reading times for Experiment 2.
| FIXED EFFECTS | B | S.E. | T | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 3424 | 37.8 | 90.6 | <.001 |
| IS – DS | 116 | 26.7 | 4.3 | <.001 |
| NS – DS | 64 | 47.7 | 1.3 | .181 |
[i] DS = Direct Speech;
IS = Indirect Speech;
NS = Non-Speech.
P-values were calculated using Satterthwaite approximations (lmerTest package).
Figure 2
Model-estimated effects of Reporting Style on first-pass oral reading times in Experiment 2. The error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.
Table 6
Mean first-pass reading times and SDs (in ms) across experimental conditions in Experiment 3.
| INTERFERENCE | REPORTING STYLE | N | MEAN FPRT | SD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phonological | Direct Speech | 309 | 1474 | 833 |
| Phonological | Indirect Speech | 310 | 1418 | 965 |
| Manual | Direct Speech | 306 | 1896 | 1162 |
| Manual | Indirect Speech | 302 | 1715 | 1152 |
[i] N = no. of observations;
fpRT = first-pass reading time;
SD = standard deviation.
Table 7
Generalised linear mixed-effect model estimates of first-pass reading times for Experiment 3.
| FIXED EFFECTS | B | S.E. | T | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 1624 | 15.1 | 107.3 | <.001 |
| PI-MI | –325 | 21.4 | –15.2 | <.001 |
| DS-IS | 166 | 16.4 | 10.1 | <.001 |
| PI-MI x DS-IS | –207 | 12.3 | –16.8 | <.001 |
[i] PI = Phonological Interference;
MI = Manual Interference;
DS = Direct Speech;
IS = Indirect Speech.
P-values were calculated using Satterthwaite approximations (lmerTest package).
Figure 3
Model-estimated effects of Interference and Reporting Style on first-pass reading times in Experiment 3. The error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.