8/16/2019 Psych Poster Handout

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/psych-poster-handout 1/1

Reading Time on The Ambiguous Word

Individual Differences in Reading and Spelling Skill Affect Lexical

Ambiguity Resolution

Ashley N. Abraham,1 Jocelyn R. Folk,1 Michael A. Eskenazi,1 & Angela C. Jones,2

1Kent State University, Kent, OH, 2John Carroll University, University Heights, OH

Research Question: Do high skill and low skill spellers use context differently to

resolve semantic ambiguity?

Background

• Low skill spellers rely more on context to recognize words

• Effortful word identification due to inefficient connections

between orthography and semantics

• Experience more interference during a memory-probe task (Andrews

& Bond, 2009)

• Spelling may be a better indicator of skill (Andrews & Bond, 2009)

• Requires precision

• Index of highly specified lexical representations.

Current Study

• Examines the use of context among high and low skilled spellers during a silent

reading task

• Ambiguous words preceded by subordinate-biasing context

• Subordinate Bias Effect (SBE): Slower on ambiguous word when

prior context consistent with subordinate vs neutral context (Dopkins

et al., 1992; Duffy et al., 1988)

• Investigated whether high- and low-skill spellers use context to resolve

semantic ambiguity in the same way?

733 729729

758

690

700

710

720

730

740

750

760

770

780

Low Skill High Skill

   T   i   m   e   i   n   M   i    l    l   i   s   e   c   o   n    d   s

Spelling Skill

Neutral

Context

Background

Participants:101 Kent State University students participated for course credit.

Skill Assessment

• Comprehension subtest percentile score on the Nelson-Denny Reading Test

• Spelling recall and recognition measures.

Stimuli

• Materials adopted from Dopkins, Morris, and Rayner (1992)

• Biased ambiguous words embedded into sentences between two clauses

• 1st clause: contained either context supporting the subordinate meaning

or neutral material, providing no support for either meaning

• The clause following the ambiguous word a lways disambiguated to the

subordinate meaning.Context : Viciously snarling and growling, the boxer soon barked at the baggage

attendant.

Neutral :  As we had all expected and feared, the boxer soon barked at the baggage

attendant.

Procedure

• Participants read 24 experimental sentences using moving window

paradigm

• Reading times in critical regions were recorded using EPrime software

• 10 filler sentences followed by true o r false questions.

• 6 participants removed for scoring below 80% on the

comprehension questions

• The average comprehension question score was 93%

Methods

Range7-68

• Analyzed using a Linear Mixed-Effect Model (LMM) using R statistical

software (R project, 2013).

Low Skill Spellers

• Reading Time on Ambiguous Word : No significant differences between

neutral and subordinate context conditions on the ambiguous word.

• No SBE in subordinate context condition.

• Reading Time on Disambiguating Region : A trend for shorter reading

times in subordinate context vs. neutral context condition

• Indicates that context appropriate subordinate meaning

was initially selected

High Skill Spellers

• Reading Time on Ambiguous Word : Longer reading times in context

condition vs neutral condition

• SBE - competition between subordinate and dominant

interpretations

• Reading Time on Disambiguating Region : Significantly faster in

subordinate context vs neutral context condition.

• Initially selected context appropriate subordinate

interpretation in subordinate context condition

Results

Conclusions

Spelling Scores

Composite Spelling

Average 49.5 (out of 70)

Standard

Deviation19.63

Range 7-68

Number of Participants

Low 32

High 34

NS *

Andrews, S., & Bond, R. (2009). Lexical expertise and reading skill: Bottom-up and top-down processing of 

lexical ambiguity. Reading and Writing, 22(6), 687-711.

Dopkins, S., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1992). Lexical ambiguity and eye fixations in reading:

A test of competing models of lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of memory and language, 31(4), 461-

476.

Duffy, S. A., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of 

memory and language, 27 (4), 429-446.

Pacht, J. M., & Rayner, K. (1993). The processing of homophonic homographs during reading:

Evidence from eye movement studies.  Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22(2), 251-271.

The results support the claim that low skill spellers rely more on context

for word recognition.

High skill spellers show SBE

• Context re-orders availability of subordinate interpretation, making it

available close in time to the dominant

• Select context appropriate subordinate meaning, allowing them to

read the disambiguating material quickly.

Low skill spellers did not show SBE

• No competition between meanings of the ambiguous word

• Faster reading times in the disambiguating region suggest low skill

spellers initially selected the subordinate meaning.

Differences in reading comprehension skill only showed successful (high)

vs unsuccessful (low) comprehension of the biased ambiguous word.

Tentative explanation is that slower lexical activation of low skill spellers

allows top-down activation of subordinate interpretation from context

to exert influence earlier in lexical access process, eliminating the SBE.

Note: The average spelling score was 71%. Low skill spellers < 33%. High skill spellers > 66%.

References

Reading Time on the Disambiguating Region

231622282253

2103

2000

2050

2100

2150

2200

2250

2300

2350

2400

2450

2500

Low Skill High Skill

   T   i   m   e   i   n   M   i    l    l   i   s   e   c   o   n    d   s

Spelling Skill

Neutral

Context

*+