Abstract
We report an eyetracking study investigating the effects of linguistic focus on eye movements and memory during two readings of a text. Across two presentations of the text, a critical word either changed to a semantically related word or remained unchanged. Focus on the critical word was manipulated using context. Eye movements were monitored during reading, and there was a secondary task of detecting the word change. Results indicated that when a word changed, participants were more successful at detecting it when it was in focus. In the second display, there were more fixations and longer viewing times on a changed than on an unchanged word, but only when the critical word was in focus; eye movement data for changed and unchanged words did not differ when the word was not in focus. We suggest that linguistic focus leads to more detailed lexical semantic representations but not more effortful initial encoding of information.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Birch, S. L., &Garnsey, S. M. (1995). The effect of focus on memory for words in sentences.Journal of Memory & Language,34, 232–267.
Birch, S. [L.], &Rayner, K. (1997). Linguistic focus affects eye movements during reading.Memory & Cognition,25, 653–660.
Blanchard, H. E., Pollatsek, A., &Rayner, K. (1989). The acquisition of parafoveal word information in reading.Perception & Psychophysics,46, 85–94.
Bredart, S., &Modolo, K. (1988). Moses strikes again: Focalization effect on a semantic illusion.Acta Psychologica,67, 135–144.
British National Corpus (1995). Available at www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk.
Chomsky, N. (1971). Deep structure, surface structure and semantic interpretation. In D. D. Steinberg & L. A. Jakobovits (Eds.),Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics and psychology (pp. 183–216). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Conrad, F. G., &Rips, L. J. (1986). Conceptual combination and the given/new distinction.Journal of Memory & Language,25, 255–278.
Cutler, A., &Fodor, J. A. (1979). Semantic focus and sentence comprehension.Cognition,7, 49–59.
Erickson, T. D., &Mattson, M. E. (1981). From words to meaning: A semantic illusion.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,20, 540–551.
Ferreira, F., Bailey, K. G. D., &Ferraro, V. (2002). Good-enough representations in language comprehension.Current Directions in Psychological Science,11, 11–15.
Gergely, G. (1992). Focus-based inferences in sentence comprehension. In I. A. Sag & A. Szabolcsi (Eds.),Lexical matters (pp. 47–65). Stanford: Stanford Center for the Study of Language & Information.
Gernsbacher, M. A., &Hargreaves, D. (1988). Accessing sentence participants: The advantage of first mention.Journal of Memory & Language,27, 699–717.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1967). Notes on transitivity and theme in English, part 2.Journal of Linguistics,3, 199–244.
Hobbs, J. R. (1985, August).Granularity. Paper presented at the 9th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Los Angeles.
Hollingworth, A., &Henderson, J. M. (2002). Accurate visual memory for previously attended objects in natural scenes.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,28, 113–136.
Hollingworth, A., &Henderson, J. M. (2003). Testing a conceptual locus for the inconsistent object change detection advantage in realworld scenes.Memory & Cognition,31, 930–940.
Hollingworth, A., Williams, C. C., &Henderson, J. M. (2001). To see and remember: Visually specific information is retained in memory from previously attended objects in natural scenes.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,8, 761–768.
Morris, R. K., &Folk, J. R. (1998). Focus as a contextual priming mechanism in reading.Memory & Cognition,26, 1313–1322.
Raney, G. E. (2003). A context-dependent representation model for explaining text repetition effects.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,10, 15–28.
Raney, G. E., &Rayner, K. (1995). Word frequency effects and eye movements during two readings of a text.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,49, 151–172.
Raney, G. E., Therriault, D. J., &Minkoff, S. R. B. (2000). Repetition effects from paraphrased text: Evidence for an integrated representation model of text representation.Discourse Processes,29, 61–81.
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.
Rensink, R. A., O’Regan, J. K., &Clark, J. J. (1997). To see or not to see: The need for attention to perceive changes in scenes.Psychological Science,8, 368–373.
Rooth, M. (1995). Focus. In S. Lappin (Ed.),The handbook of contemporary semantic theory (pp. 271–298). Oxford: Blackwell.
Sanford, A. J., &Sturt, P. (2002). Depth of processing in language comprehension: Not noticing the evidence.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,6, 382–386.
Sturt, P., Sanford, A. J., Stewart, A., &Dawydiak, E. (2004). Linguistic focus and good-enough representations: An application of the change-detection paradigm.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,11, 882–888.
Thornton, I. M., &Fernandez-Duque, D. (2002). Converging evidence for the detection of change without awareness. In J. Hyönä, D. P. Munoz, W. Heide, & R. Radach (Eds.),The brain’s eye: Neurobiological and clinical aspects of oculomotor research (pp. 99–118). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Zimmer, H. D., &Engelkamp, J. (1981). The given-new structure of cleft sentences and their influence on picture viewing.Psychological Research,43, 375–389.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by ESRC Grant R000239888.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ward, P., Sturt, P. Linguistic focus and memory: An eye movement study. Memory & Cognition 35, 73–86 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195944
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195944