Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T02:32:20.083Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY IN EYE-TRACKING

An Empirical Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 June 2013

Patti Spinner ,
Susan M. Gass  and
Jennifer Behney
Patti Spinner*
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Susan M. Gass
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Jennifer Behney
Affiliation:
Youngstown State University
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Patti Spinner, SLS Program, B-258 Wells Hall, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824; E-mail: spinnerp@msu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 35 , Issue 2: Eye-Movement Recordings in Second Language Research , June 2013 , pp. 389 - 415
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 thank Aline Godfroid for early discussions on research design and Sehoon Jung and Russ Werner for assistance with the eye-tracker. We also thank Zhen Zhang for assistance with the statistical analysis.

Versions of this article were presented at SLRF 2010 and Eurosla 2010 and 2011.

References

REFERENCES

Alarcón, I. (2005). The second language acquisition of Spanish gender agreement: The effects of linguistic variables on accuracy (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana University, Bloomington.Google Scholar
Altarriba, J., Kroll, J. F., 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 & Cognition, 24, 477–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr, D. J. (2008). Analyzing “visual world” eyetracking data using multilevel logistic regression. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 457–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blumenfeld, H. K., & Marian, V. (2007). Constraints on parallel activation in bilingual spoken language processing: Examining proficiency and lexical status using eye-tracking. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22, 633–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blumenfeld, H. K., & Marian, V. (2011). Bilingualism influences inhibitory control in auditory comprehension. Cognition, 118, 245–257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bolger, P., & Zapata, G. (2011). Semantic categories and context in L2 vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 61, 614–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bordag, D., Opitz, A., & Pechmann, T. (2006). Gender processing in first and second languages: The role of noun termination. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 1090–1101.Google ScholarPubMed
Bordag, D., & Pechmann, T. (2007). Factors influencing L2 gender processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 299–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bordag, D., & Pechmann, T. (2008). Grammatical gender in translation. Second Language Research, 24, 139–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowles, M. A. (2010). The think-aloud controversy in second language research. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braze, D., Shankweiler, D., Ni, W., & Palumbo, L. C. (2002). Reader’s eye movements distinguish anomalies of form and content. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31, 25–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, J. D. (1988). Understanding research in second language learning: A teacher’s guide to statistics and research design. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brown, J. D. (2012). Writing up a replication report. In Porte, G. (Ed.), Replication research in applied linguistics (pp. 173–197). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cain, J., Weber-Olsen, M., & Smith, R. (1987). Acquisition strategies in a first and second language: Are they the same? Journal of Child Language, 14, 333–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carreiras, M., & Clifton, C. (1999). Another word on parsing relative clauses: Eyetracking evidence from Spanish and English. Memory & Cognition, 27, 826–833.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carroll, S. E. (1999). Input and SLA: Adults’ sensitivity to different sorts of cues to French gender. Language Learning, 49, 37–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahan, D., Swingley, D., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Magnuson, J. S. (2000). Linguistic gender and spoken-word recognition in French. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 465–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dussias, P. E. (2004). Parsing a first language like a second: The erosion of L1 parsing strategies in Spanish-English bilinguals. International Journal of Bilingualism, 8, 355–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dussias, P. E. (2010). Uses of eye-tracking data in second language sentence processing research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 30, 149–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dussias, P. E., & Sagarra, N. (2007). The effect of exposure on syntactic parsing in Spanish-English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 101–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dussias, P. E., Valdés Kroff, J. R., Guzzardo Tamargo, R. E., & Gerfen, C. (this issue). When gender and looking go hand in hand: Grammatical gender processing in L2 Spanish. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35.Google Scholar
Duyck, W., Van Assche, E., Drieghe, D., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (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
Erlich, S. F., & Rayner, K. (1981). Contextual effects on word perception and eye movements during reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 227–235.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
Fernández-García, M. (1999). Patterns of gender agreement in the speech of second language learners. In Gutiérrez-Rexach, J. & Martínez-Gil, F. (Eds.), Advances in Hispanic linguistics: Papers from the 2nd Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp. 3–15). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Finnemann, M. D. (1992). Learning agreement in the noun phrase: The strategies of three first-year Spanish students. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 30, 121–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flecken, M. (2011). Event conceptualization by early Dutch-German bilinguals: Insights from linguistic and eye-tracking data. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14, 61–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franceschina, F. (2005). Fossilized second language grammars: The acquisition of grammatical gender. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franck, J., Vigliocco, G., Antón-Mendéz, I., Collina, S., & Frauenfelder, U. H. (2008). The interplay of syntax and form in sentence production: A cross-linguistic study of form effects on agreement. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 329–374.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2000). Stimulated recall methodology in second language research. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2007). Data elicitation for second and foreign language research. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grüter, T., Lew-Williams, C., & Fernald, A. (2011). Grammatical gender in L2: Where is the problem? In Danis, N., Mesh, K., & Sung, H. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 246–258). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Guillelmon, D., & Grosjean, F. (2001). The gender marking effect in spoken word recognition: The case of bilinguals. Memory & Cognition, 29, 503–511.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gutiérrez, X. (2013). The construct validity of grammaticality judgment tests as measures of implicit and explicit knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernandez, A. E., Kotz, S. A., Hoffman, J., Valentin, V. V., Dapretto, M., & Bookheimer, S. Y. (2004). The neural correlates of grammatical gender decisions in Spanish. Brain Imaging, 1, 863–866.Google Scholar
Ju, M., & Luce, P. A. (2004). Falling on sensitive ears: Constraints on bilingual lexical activation. Psychological Science, 15, 314–318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaushanskaya, M., & Marian, V. (2007). Bilingual language processing and interference in bilinguals: Evidence from eye tracking and picture naming. Language Learning, 57, 119–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, G. D. (2009). Sensitivity to violations of gender agreement in native and nonnative Spanish: An eye-movement investigation. Language Learning, 59, 503–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leeser, M., & Sunderman, D. (2012). Methodological issues of working memory tasks for L2 processing research. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
Lew-Williams, C., & Fernald, A. (2010). Real-time processing of gender-marked articles by native and non-native Spanish speakers. Journal of Memory and Language, 63, 447–464.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loewen, S. (2009). Grammaticality judgment tests and the measurement of implicit and explicit L2 knowledge. In Ellis, R., Loewen, S., Elder, C., Erlam, R., Philp, J., & Reinders, H. (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching (pp. 94–112). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A. (2012). Why (or why not), when and how to replicate research. In Porte, G. (Ed.), Replication research in applied linguistics (pp. 34–69). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2012). Research methods in second language acquisition: A practical guide. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Marian, V., Blumenfeld, H. K., & Boukrina, O. V. (2008). Sensitivity to phonological similarity within and across languages: A native/non-native asymmetry in bilinguals. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 37, 141–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marian, V., & Spivey, M. (2003). Competing activation in bilingual language processing: Within- and between-language competition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6, 97–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonough, K., & Trofimovich, P. (2009). Using priming methods in second language research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Merlonghi, F., Merlonghi, F., Tursi, F., & O’Connor, B. (2006). Oggi in Italia: A first course in Italian (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Mirman, D., Dixon, J. A., & Magnuson, J. S. (2008). Statistical and computational models of the visual world paradigm: Growth curves and individual differences. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 475–494.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ni, W., Fodor, J. D., Crain, S., & Shankweiler, D. (1998). Anomaly detection: Eye movement patterns. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 515–539.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nunan, D. (1992). Research methods in language learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Oller, J., & Tullius, J. (1973). Reading skills of non-native speakers of English. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 11, 69–79.Google Scholar
O’Rourke, B. (2008). The other C in CMC: What alternative data sources can tell us about text-based synchronous computer mediated communication and language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21, 227–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polio, C., & Gass, S. (1997). Replication and reporting: A commentary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 499–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayner, K., & Duffy, S. A. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory & Cognition, 14, 191–201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, L. (2012). Psycholinguistic techniques and resources in second language acquisition research. Second Language Research, 28, 113–127.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schachter, J., & Gass, S. (Eds.). (1996). Second language classroom research: Issues and opportunities. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Schlig, C. (2003). Analysis of agreement errors made by third-year students. Hispania, 86, 312–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmiedtová, B. (2011). Do L2 speakers think in the L1 when speaking in the L2? Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8, 139–179.Google Scholar
Seliger, H. W., & Shohamy, E. (1990). Second language research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stark, C. E., & McClelland, J. L. (2000). Repetition priming for words, pseudowords, and nonwords. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 945–972.Google ScholarPubMed
Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268, 1632–1634.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Assche, E., Drieghe, D., Duyck, W., Welvaert, M., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2011). The influence of semantic constraints on bilingual word recognition during sentence reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 88–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, A., & Cutler, A. (2004). Lexical competition in non-native spoken-word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar