Figure 1
Display for the sentence The boy will eat the cake or The boy will move the cake.
Note: Images were updated from the original Altmann & Kamide (1999) stimuli.
Table 1
Mean word durations (rounded to nearest ms) for sentence stimuli in Studies 1 and 2, along with the values from Altmann & Kamide (1999, Table 2, p. 254) for comparison.
| PREDICTIVE CONDITION | NEUTRAL CONDITION | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VERB | BREAK | “THE” | TOTAL | VERB | BREAK | “THE” | TOTAL | |
| Study 1 | 523 | – | 147 | 670 | 551 | – | 137 | 688 |
| Study 2 | 489 | – | 155 | 644 | 499 | – | 154 | 653 |
| A & K | 383 | 192 | 122 | 697 | 423 | 180 | 107 | 710 |
[i] Note: Sentences in Altmann & Kamide (1999) included a post-verb break; the current studies did not.
Figure 2
Study 1: Proportion of fixation durations to regions of interest, by condition.
Note: The y-axis presents the proportion of each 10-ms bin that was spent fixating the regions of interest (ROIs): the agent (e.g. the boy), the target (e.g. the cake), and any of the competitor objects (e.g. the sum of fixations to the car, ball, and train). Nonsense objects, which were included in half of critical trials, were included in the total of competitor fixations. The total proportion of fixations within a bin does not sum to one because of the time spent looking outside of the ROIs. The x-axis presents time starting from 200 ms before the verb onset, which is aligned at 0 ms; the means of verb offset and noun on- and offset times are shown for illustrative purposes.
Figure 3
Study 1: Median latency to fixate the target by condition by subject.
Table 2
Trials With and Without Target Fixations in the Anticipatory Window.
| TARGET FIXATED | TARGET NOT FIXATED | NO LOOKS IN ROIS | TOTAL TRIALS | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study 1 | Predictive | 324 (39%) | 489 (58%) | 26 (3%) | 839 |
| Neutral | 261 (31%) | 542 (64%) | 38 (5%) | 841 | |
| Study 2 | Predictive | 579 (32%) | 1147 (64%) | 68 (4%) | 1794 |
| Neutral | 0 (0%) | 1379 (77%) | 414 (23%) | 1793 |
Figure 4
Study 1: Target fixation probability by condition by subject.
Table 3
Performance on Language Experience Tasks in Study 1.
| MEASURE | POSSIBLE RANGE | OBSERVED RANGE | MEAN SCORE (SD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| ART | Min: –65 | Min: 0 | 12.05 (6.34) |
| Max: 65 | Max: 30 | ||
| ERVT | Min: –12 | Min: 1.5 | 13.97 (6.19) |
| Max: 48 | Max: 29.25 | ||
| NAART | Min: 0 | Min: 10a | 29.06 (7.68) |
| Max: 61 | Max: 48 | ||
| CRH | Min: 5 | Min: 8 | 21.14 (4.32) |
| Max:35 | Max: 31 | ||
| RTE | Min: 0 | Min: 6 | 19.77 (8.34) |
| Max: 63 | Max: 41 |
[i] Note: ART = Author Recognition Test, ERVT = Extended Range Vocabulary Test, NAART = North American Adult Reading Test, CRH = Comparative Reading Habits, RTE = Reading Time Estimate. a This subject accidentally skipped one item, so the score is out of 60. Proportion correct are used in the analyses.
Table 4
Correlations Among Comparative Reading Habits Items in Study 1.
| TIME | COMPLEX | ENJOY | UNDERSTAND | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Complex | 0.279** | – | ||
| Enjoy | 0.510*** | 0.214* | – | |
| Speed | 0.196* | 0.283** | 0.424*** | – |
| Understand | 0.136 | 0.121 | 0.270** | 0.498*** |
[i] Note: Participants answered five questions in which they compared themselves with their peers on how much time they spend reading (“Tme”), how complex their reading material is (“Complex”), how much they enjoy reading (“Enjoy”), how fast they read (“speed”), and how well they understand the material when reading at their normal pace (“Understand”). + p < 0.1. * p < 0.05. ** p < 0.01. *** p < 0.001.
Table 5
Correlations Among Reading Time Estimate Items in Study 1.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Textbooks | – | |||||||
| 2. Academic textsa | 0.03 | – | ||||||
| 3. Magazines | 0.07 | –0.02 | – | |||||
| 4. Newspapers | –0.05 | 0.28** | 0.45*** | – | ||||
| 5. Emails | 0.16 | 0.24* | 0.22* | 0.24* | – | |||
| 6. Websitesb | 0. 11 | 0.33*** | 0.17+ | 0.16+ | 0.49*** | – | ||
| 7. Fiction | 0.08 | 0.21* | 0.18+ | 0.17+ | 0.07 | 0.09 | – | |
| 8. Non-fiction | 0.02 | 0.24* | 0.23* | 0.30** | 0.18+ | 0.06 | 0.59*** | – |
| 9. Other | 0.09 | 0.31** | 0.23* | 0.34*** | 0.28** | 0.21* | 0.405*** | 0.49*** |
[i] Note: Participants estimated how much time they spent reading different types of material in a typical week. + p < 0.1. * p < 0.05. ** p < 0.01. *** p < 0.001. a Other than textbooks. b Other than email.
Table 6
Correlations Among Language Experience Task Scores in Study 1.
| ART | NAART | ERVT | CRH | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NAART | 0.55*** | – | ||
| ERVT | 0.66*** | 0.66*** | – | |
| CRH | 0.39*** | 0.34*** | 0.47*** | – |
| RTE | 0.17+ | 0.14 | 0.053 | 0.32*** |
[i] Notes: ART = Author Recognition Test, NAART = North American Adult Reading Test, ERVT = Extended Range Vocabulary Test, CRH = Comparative Reading Habits, RTE = Reading Time Estimate. + p < 0.1. * p < 0.05. ** p < 0.01. *** p < 0.001.
Figure 5
Proportion of fixation durations to regions of interest, by condition.
Note: The y-axis presents the proportion of each 10-ms bin that was spent fixating the regions of interest (ROIs): the agent (e.g. the boy), the target (e.g. the cake), and any of the competitor objects (e.g. the sum of fixations to the car, ball, and train). Nonsense objects, which were included in half of critical trials, were included in the total of competitor fixations. The total proportion of fixations within a bin does not sum to one because of the time spent looking outside of the ROIs. The x-axis presents time starting from 200 ms before the verb onset, which is aligned at 0 ms; the means of verb offset and noun on- and offset times are shown for illustrative purposes.
Figure 6
Study 2: Median latency to fixate the target by condition by subject.
Note: Latencies here are much larger overall than in Study 1.
Figure 7
Study 2: Target fixation probability by condition by subject.
Note: There were no target fixations in the neutral condition during the anticipatory window.
Table 7
Study 2 Individual Difference Battery Performance.
| DOMAIN | TASK | POSSIBLE RANGE | OBSERVED RANGE | MEAN (SD) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Language experience | 1 ART | [–65, 65] | [–9; 42] | 10.44 (11.40) |
| 2 NAART | [0; 1]a | [0.30; 0.89] | 0.56 (0.12) | |
| 3 ERVT | [0; 48] | [1.25; 36.75] | 17.36 (7.23) | |
| 4 CRH | [7; 35] | [9; 33] | 22.13 (5.09) | |
| 5 RTE | [0; 63] | [5; 63] | 20.37 (10.95) | |
| Working memory | 6 RSpan | [0;10] | [2.78; 10] | 6.77 (1.72) |
| 7 LSpan | [0;10] | [5.63; 10] | 8.91 (0.96) | |
| 8 OSpan | [0;15] | [1.85; 14.83] | 10.61 (3.45) | |
| Inhibitory controlb | 9 AntiSac | n/a | [–1.97; 0.27] | –0.55 (0.31) |
| 10 Flanker | n/a | [–0.26; 0.34] | 0.15 (0.07) | |
| 11 Stroop | n/a | [–0.15; 0.51] | 0.18 (0.14) | |
| Phon. ability | 12 Pseudo | [0; 1]c | [0.62; 0.95] | 0.80 (0.07) |
| 13 BNW | [0; 1]d | [0.13; 0.96] | 0.65 (0.16) | |
| 14 PR | [0; 1]d | [0.14; 1] | 0.69 (0.15) | |
| Perceptual speede | 15 LComp | 0+ | [41; 120] | 70.15 (14.25) |
| 16 PComp | 0+ | [46; 109] | 81.12 (13.48) |
[i] Notes: a Proportion correct of 61 items. b Scores are log interference scores (RT difference); ranges are not meaningful here. c Proportion correct of 416 syllables across 96 items. d Proportion correct of 18 items. e Participants complete as many items as possible in six 20-second blocks; the final score is the total of correct items.
Table 8
Correlations Among Comparative Reading Habits Items in Study 2.
| TIME | COMPLEX | ENJOY | UNDERSTAND | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Complex | 0.568** | – | ||
| Enjoy | 0.619*** | 0.446*** | – | |
| Speed | 0.321** | 0.226* | 0.354*** | – |
| Understand | 0.457*** | 0.338*** | 0.249* | 0.437*** |
[i] Note: Participants answered five questions in which they compared themselves with their peers on how much time they spend reading (“Tme”), how complex their reading material is (“Complex”), how much they enjoy reading (“Enjoy”), how fast they read (“speed”), and how well they understand the material when reading at their normal pace (“Understand”). + p < 0.1. * p < 0.05. ** p < 0.01. *** p < 0.001.
Table 9
Correlations Among Reading Time Estimate Items in Study 2.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Textbooks | – | |||||||
| 2. Academic textsa | 0.51*** | – | ||||||
| 3. Magazines | 0.24* | 0.25* | – | |||||
| 4. Newspapers | 0.25* | 0.39** | 0.62*** | – | ||||
| 5. Emails | 0.24* | 0.42*** | 0.50*** | 0.50*** | – | |||
| 6. Websitesb | 0.01 | 0.21* | 0.30** | 0.40*** | 0.44*** | – | ||
| 7. Fiction | 0.11 | 0.15 | 0.37*** | 0.39*** | 0.36*** | 0.38*** | – | |
| 8. Non-fiction | 0.37*** | 0.46*** | 0.39*** | 0.49*** | 0.40*** | 0.33*** | 0.57*** | – |
| 9. Other | 0.23* | 0.37*** | 0.47*** | 0.53*** | 0.46*** | 0.40*** | 0.54*** | 0.57*** |
[i] Note: Participants estimated how much time they spent reading different types of material in a typical week. + p < 0.1. * p < 0.05. ** p < 0.01. *** p < 0.001. a Other than textbooks. b Other than email.
Table 10
Correlations Among Language Experience Task Scores in Study 2.
| ART | NAART | ERVT | CRH | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NAART | 0.39*** | – | ||
| ERVT | 0.45*** | 0.68*** | – | |
| CRH | 0.25** | 0.26** | 0.35*** | – |
| RTE | 0.194* | 0.182+ | 0.10 | 0.387*** |
[i] Note: ART = Author Recognition Test, NAART = North American Adult Reading Test, ERVT = Extended Range Vocabulary Test, CRH = Comparative Reading Habits, RTE = Reading Time Estimate. + p < 0.1. * p < 0.05. ** p < 0.01. *** p < 0.001.