Word order effects in sentence reading

The SEAM model (Rabe et al., 2024) and the OB1-Reader model (Snell, van Leipsig, et al., 2018) suggest that readers lexically process words in parallel, with the OB1 model further specifying that those words are formed into a sentence-level representation irrespective of their order of presentation. The serial model, E-Z Reader (Reichle, 2011), in contrast, stipulates that words are identified serially and sequentially. The current eye tracking experiment investigated whether, how frequently, and how rapidly readers detect sentential anomalies arising from word transpositions and ungrammatical sentence final words. We also assessed the consequences in the eye movement record of processing such transpositions and ungrammaticalities to evaluate theoretical claims extrapolated from different eye movement models. This was done via target word pair (transposed vs. non-transposed) and a final word grammaticality (grammatical vs. ungrammatical) experimental manipulations. Readers were better at judging the grammaticality of sentences containing both a word transposition and an ungrammatical final word than those with solely a word transposition. Critically, transposed words caused significant disruption to reading, but not prior to readers fixating the first word of the transposed word pair. Furthermore, an ungrammatical sentence-final word attracted readers' fixations and caused increased re-reading in the absence of a word transposition compared to when it was preceded by a transposed word pair. Together the results show the importance of canonical word order for natural undisrupted reading and question claims for parallel lexical identification in relation to eye movement control during reading.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cognitive Psychology
Published
2025-02-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101715
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Reading and Literacy Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.89

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Word order effects in sentence reading

Simon P. Liversedge, Federica Degno, Petar Atanasov
2 citations
Cognitive Psychology
Reading and Literacy Development
6.89
article

Word order effects in sentence reading

Simon P. Liversedge, Federica Degno, Petar Atanasov
article en
2 citations

Abstract

The SEAM model (Rabe et al., 2024) and the OB1-Reader model (Snell, van Leipsig, et al., 2018) suggest that readers lexically process words in parallel, with the OB1 model further specifying that those words are formed into a sentence-level representation irrespective of their order of presentation. The serial model, E-Z Reader (Reichle, 2011), in contrast, stipulates that words are identified serially and sequentially. The current eye tracking experiment investigated whether, how frequently, and how rapidly readers detect sentential anomalies arising from word transpositions and ungrammatical sentence final words. We also assessed the consequences in the eye movement record of processing such transpositions and ungrammaticalities to evaluate theoretical claims extrapolated from different eye movement models. This was done via target word pair (transposed vs. non-transposed) and a final word grammaticality (grammatical vs. ungrammatical) experimental manipulations. Readers were better at judging the grammaticality of sentences containing both a word transposition and an ungrammatical final word than those with solely a word transposition. Critically, transposed words caused significant disruption to reading, but not prior to readers fixating the first word of the transposed word pair. Furthermore, an ungrammatical sentence-final word attracted readers' fixations and caused increased re-reading in the absence of a word transposition compared to when it was preceded by a transposed word pair. Together the results show the importance of canonical word order for natural undisrupted reading and question claims for parallel lexical identification in relation to eye movement control during reading.

Cognitive PsychologyVol. 157
University of Lancashire (GB), Bournemouth University (GB)
University of Central Lancashire, Fundação Bial, Economic and Social Research Council
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Reading and Literacy Development
6.89
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.