Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-12T01:42:09.778Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

USING EYE-TRACKING TO INVESTIGATE TOPICS IN L2 ACQUISITION AND L2 PROCESSING

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 June 2013

Leah Roberts  and
Anna Siyanova-Chanturia
Leah Roberts*
Affiliation:
University of York
Anna Siyanova-Chanturia*
Affiliation:
Victoria University of Wellington
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Anna Siyanova-Chanturia, School of Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand, 6140. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Second language (L2) researchers are becoming more interested in both L2 learners’ knowledge of the target language and how that knowledge is put to use during real-time language processing. Researchers are therefore beginning to see the importance of combining traditional L2 research methods with those that capture the moment-by-moment interpretation of the target language, such as eye-tracking. The major benefit of the eye-tracking method is that it can tap into real-time (or online) comprehension processes during the uninterrupted processing of the input, and thus, the data can be compared to those elicited by other, more metalinguistic tasks to offer a broader picture of language acquisition and processing. In this article, we present an overview of the eye-tracking technique and illustrate the method with L2 studies that show how eye-tracking data can be used to (a) investigate language-related topics and (b) inform key debates in the fields of L2 acquisition and L2 processing.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 35 , Issue 2: Eye-Movement Recordings in Second Language Research , June 2013 , pp. 213 - 235
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

We would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on previous versions of this article.

References

REFERENCES

Altarriba, J., Kroll, J., Scholl, A., & Rayner, K. (1996). The influence of lexical and conceptual constraints on reading mixed language sentences: Evidence from eye fixation and naming times. Memory and Cognition, 24, 477–492.Google Scholar
Altmann, G. (2011). Language can mediate eye movement control within 100 milliseconds, regardless of whether there is anything to move the eyes to. Acta Psychologica, 137, 190–200.Google Scholar
Balota, D., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1985). The interaction of contextual constraints and parafoveal visual information in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 364–390.Google Scholar
Boland, J. E. (1993). The role of verb argument structure in sentence processing: Distinguishing between syntactic and semantic effects. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2, 133–152.Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M., Drieghe, D., & Vitu, F. (2005). Word skipping: Implications for theories of eye movement control in reading. In Underwood, G. (Ed.), Cognitive processes in eye guidance (pp. 53–77). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M., & Vitu, E. (1998). Word skipping: Implications for theories of eye movement control in reading. In Underwood, G. (Ed.), Eye guidance in reading and scene perception (pp. 125–148). Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Camblin, C. C., Gordon, P. C., & Swaab, T. Y. (2007). The interplay of discourse congruence and lexical association during sentence processing: Evidence from ERPs and eye tracking. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 103–128.Google Scholar
Carpenter, P., & Just, M. (1983). What your eyes do while your mind is reading. In Rayner, K. (Ed.), Eye movements in reading: Perceptual and language processes (pp. 275–307). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures in government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3–42.Google Scholar
Clifton, C. Jr., Staub, A., & Rayner, K. (2007). Eye movements in reading words and sentences. In Van Gompel, R., Fisher, M., Murray, W., & Hill, R. L. (Eds.), Eye movement research: A window on mind and brain (pp. 341–372). Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Costa, A., Caramazza, A., & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2000). The cognate facilitation effect: Implications for models of lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1283–1296.Google Scholar
De Groot, A. M. B. (2011). Language and cognition in bilinguals and multilinguals: An introduction. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T., Grainger, J., & Van Heuven, W. J. B. (1999). Recognition of cognates and interlingual homographs: The neglected role of phonology. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 496–518.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T., & Van Heuven, W. J. B. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5, 175–197.Google Scholar
Duffy, A. A., Kambe, G., & Rayner, K. (2001). The effect of prior disambiguating context on the comprehension of ambiguous words: Evidence from eye movements. In Gorfein, D. S. (Ed.), On the consequences of meaning selection: Perspectives on resolving lexical ambiguity—Decade of behavior (pp. 105–117). Washington, DC: American Psychological Society.Google Scholar
Duyck, W., Van Assche, E., Drighe, D., & Hartsuiker, R. (2007). Visual word recognition by bilinguals in a sentence context: Evidence for nonselective lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 663–679.Google Scholar
Ehrlich, S. F., & Rayner, K. (1981). Contextual effects on word recognition and eye movements during reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 641–655.Google Scholar
Ellert, M. (2011). Ambiguous pronoun resolution in L1 and L2 Dutch (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Ellert, M., Järvikivi, J., & Roberts, L. (in press). Resolving ambiguous pronouns in a second language: A visual-world eye-tracking study in L2 German and Dutch. International Review of Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Felser, C., & Cunnings, I. (2012). Processing reflexives in English as a second language: The role of structural and discourse-level constraints. Applied Psycholinguistics, 33, 571–603.Google Scholar
Felser, C., Sato, M., & Bertenshaw, N. (2009). The on-line application of binding Principle A in English as a second language. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 485–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J. D. (2002). Prosodic disambiguation in silent reading. In Hirotani, M. (Ed.), Proceedings of the North East Linguistics Society: Vol. 1. (pp. 113–132). Amherst, MA: Graduate Linguistic Student Association.Google Scholar
Foucart, A., & Frenck-Mestre, C. (2012). Can late L2 learners acquire grammatical features? Evidence from ERPs and eye-tracking. Journal of Memory and Language, 66, 226–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franceschina, F. (2001). Morphological or syntactic deficits in near-native speakers? An assessment of some current proposals. Second Language Research, 17, 213–247.Google Scholar
Frenck-Mestre, C. (2005). Eye-movement recording as a tool for studying syntactic processing in a second language: A review of methodologies and experimental findings. Second Language Research, 21, 175–198.Google Scholar
Frenck-Mestre, C., & Pynte, J. (1997). Syntactic ambiguity resolution while reading in second and native languages. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 50A, 119–148.Google Scholar
Gibson, E., Pearlmutter, N., Canseco-Gonzalez, E., & Hickok, G. (1996). Recency preference in the human sentence processing mechanism. Cognition, 59, 21–39.Google Scholar
Hawkins, R., & Chan, C. Y. (1997). The partial accessibility of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition: The failed functional features hypothesis. Second Language Research, 13, 187–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, J., & Ferreira, E. (1990). Effects of foveal processing difficulty on the perceptual span in reading: Implications for attention and eye movement control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 417–429.Google Scholar
Hopp, H. (2006). Syntactic features and reanalysis in near-native processing. Second Language Research, 22, 369–397.Google Scholar
Hyönä, J. (1993). Effects of thematic and lexical priming on readers’ eye movements. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 34, 293–304.Google Scholar
Indefrey, P. (2006). A meta-analysis of hemodynamic studies on first and second language processing: Which suggested differences can we trust and what do they mean? Language Learning, 56, 279–304.Google Scholar
Inhoff, A. W. (1989). Parafoveal processing of words and saccade computation during eye fixations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 544–555.Google Scholar
Inhoff, A. W., & Rayner, K. (1986). Parafoveal word processing during eye fixations in reading: Effects of word frequency. Perception and Psychophysics, 40, 431–439.Google Scholar
Just, M., & Carpenter, P. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329–354.Google Scholar
Keating, G. D. (2009). Sensitivity to violations in gender agreement in native and nonnative Spanish: An eye-movement investigation. Language Learning, 59, 503–535.Google Scholar
Kennison, S. M., & Clifton, C. Jr. (1995). Determinants of parafoveal preview benefit in high and low working memory capacity readers: Implications for eye movement control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 68–81.Google Scholar
Lemhöfer, K., & Dijkstra, T. (2004). Recognizing cognates and interlexical homographs: Effects of code similarity in language specific and generalized lexical decision. Memory and Cognition, 32, 533–550.Google Scholar
Lemhöfer, K., Dijkstra, T., & Michel, M. C. (2004). Three languages, one ECHO: Cognate effects in trilingual word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes,19, 585–611.Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Libben, M., & Titone, D. (2009). Bilingual lexical access in context: Evidence from eye movement recordings during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 381–390.Google Scholar
Liversedge, S., Paterson, K., & Pickering, M. (1998). Eye movements and measures of reading time. In Underwood, G. (Ed.), Eye guidance in reading and scene perception (pp. 55–75). Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Marian, V., & Spivey, M. (2003). Competing activation in bilingual language processing: Within- and between-language competition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6, 97–115.Google Scholar
McConkie, G., & Rayner, K. (1975). The span of the effective stimulus during a fixation in reading. Perception and Psychophysics, 17, 578–586.Google Scholar
McDonald, S., & Shillcock, R. (2003). Eye movements reveal the on-line computation of lexical probabilities during reading. Psychological Science, 14, 648–652.Google Scholar
Myles, F. (1995). Interaction between linguistic theory and language processing in SLA. Second Language Research, 11, 235–266.Google Scholar
Nicol, J., & Swinney, D. (1989). The role of structure in co-reference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 5–20.Google Scholar
Paterson, K., Liversedge, S., & Underwood, G. (1999). The influence of focus operators on syntactic processing of short relative clause sentences. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52, 717–737.Google Scholar
Pollatsek, A., Rayner, K., & Balota, D. A. (1986). Inferences about eye movement control from the perceptual span in reading. Perception and Psychophysics, 40, 123–130.Google Scholar
Rayner, K. (1975). Parafoveal identification during a fixation in reading. Acta Psychologica, 39, 271–282.Google Scholar
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372–422.Google Scholar
Rayner, K. (2009). The 35th Sir Frederick Bartlett Lecture: Eye movements and attention during reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1457–1506.Google Scholar
Rayner, K., & Bertera, J. H. (1979). Reading without a fovea. Science, 206, 468–469.Google Scholar
Rayner, K., Carlson, M., & Frazier, L., (1983). The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 358–374.Google Scholar
Rayner, K., & Duffy, S. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory and Cognition, 14, 191–201.Google Scholar
Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1989). The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Rayner, K., Sereno, S., Morris, R., Schmauder, A., & Clifton, C. (1989). Eye movements and on-line language comprehension processes. Language and Cognition Processes, 4, 21–49.Google Scholar
Rayner, K., Warren, T., Juhasz, B. J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2004). The effects of plausibility on eye movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 1290–1301.Google Scholar
Rayner, K., & Well, A. (1996). Effects of contextual constraint on eye movements in reading: A further examination. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 3, 504–509.Google Scholar
Rayner, K., Well, A., & Pollatsek, A. (1980). Asymmetry of the effective visual field in reading. Perception and Psychophysics, 27, 537–544.Google Scholar
Roberts, L. (2012a). Individual differences in second language sentence processing. In Roberts, L. & Meyer, A. (Eds.), Individual differences in second language learning. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Roberts, L. (2012b). Psycholinguistic techniques and resources in second language acquisition research. Second Language Research, 28, 113–127.Google Scholar
Roberts, L., Gullberg, M., & Indefrey, P. (2008). Online pronoun resolution in L2 discourse: L1 influence and general learner effects. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 333–357.Google Scholar
Sabourin, L., Stowe, L. A., & de Haan, G. J. (2006). Transfer effects in learning a second language grammatical gender system. Second Language Research, 22, 1–29.Google Scholar
Schwartz, A. I., Kroll, J. F., & Diaz, M. (2007). Reading words in Spanish and English: Mapping orthography to phonology in two languages. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22, 106–129.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Language Research, 12, 40–72.Google Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2011). Adding more fuel to the fire: An eye-tracking study of idiom processing by native and nonnative speakers. Second Language Research, 27, 251–272.Google Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & van Heuven, W. (2011). Seeing a phrase “time and again” matters: The role of phrasal frequency in the processing of multi-word sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Language, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 776–784.Google Scholar
Slabakova, R. (2009). L2 fundamentals. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 155–173.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. (2011). Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 1–33.Google Scholar
Sturt, P. (2003). The time-course of the application of binding constraints in reference resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 542–562.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I.-M., & Sorace, A. (2006). Differentiating interfaces: L2 performance in syntax-semantics and syntax-discourse phenomena. In Bamman, D., Magnitskaia, T., & Zaller, C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, BUCLD 30 (pp. 653–664). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Van Assche, E., Drieghe, D., Duyck, W., Welvaert, M., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2010). The influence of semantic constraints on bilingual word recognition during sentence reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 88–107.Google Scholar
Van Assche, E., Duyck, W., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Diependaele, K. (2009). Does bilingualism change native-language reading? Cognate effects in a sentence context. Psychological Science, 20, 923–927.Google Scholar
Van Gompel, R. P. G., & Pickering, M. J. (2001). Lexical guidance in sentence processing: A note on Adams, Clifton, & Mitchell (1998). Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 8, 851–857.Google Scholar
Van Hell, J. G., & De Groot, A. M. B. (2008). Sentence context affects lexical decision and word translation. Acta Psychologica, 128, 431–451.Google Scholar
Van Hell, J. G., & Dijkstra, T. (2002). Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native contexts. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 780–789.Google Scholar
Vasishth, S., & Drenhaus, H. (2011). Locality in German. Dialogue and Discourse, 1, 59–82.Google Scholar
Vitu, F., McConkie, G. W., & Zola, D. (1998). About regressive saccades in reading and their relation to word identification. In Underwood, G. (Ed.), Eye guidance in reading and scene perception (pp. 101–124). Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
White, S. (2008). Eye movement control during reading: Effects of word frequency and orthographic familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 205–223.Google Scholar
White, L., Valenzuela, E., Kozlowska-Macgregor, M., & Leung, Y.-K. I. (2004). Gender and number agreement in nonnative Spanish. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 105–133.Google Scholar
Wilson, F. (2009). Processing at the syntax-discourse interface in second language acquisition (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar