Author:
Spinner Patti,Gass Susan M.,Behney Jennifer
Abstract
Eye-trackers are becoming increasingly widespread as a tool to investigate second language (L2) acquisition. Unfortunately, clear standards for methodology—including font size, font type, and placement of interest areas—are not yet available. Although many researchers stress the need for ecological validity—that is, the simulation of natural reading conditions—it may not be prudent to use such a design to investigate new directions in eye-tracking research, and particularly in research involving small lexical items such as articles. In this study, we examine whether two different screen layouts can lead to different results in an eye-tracking study on the L2 acquisition of Italian gender. The results of an experiment with an ecologically valid design are strikingly different than the results of an experiment with a design tailored to track eye movements to articles. We conclude that differences in screen layout can have significant effects on results and that it is crucial that researchers report screen layout information.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics,Education
Reference69 articles.
1. The influence of semantic constraints on bilingual word recognition during sentence reading
2. Repetition priming for words, pseudowords, and nonwords;Stark;Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,2000
3. Do L2 speakers think in the L1 when speaking in the L2?;Schmiedtová;Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics,2011
4. Psycholinguistic techniques and resources in second language acquisition research
Cited by
14 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献