Psychologie

The E-Z Reader model (Reichle et al. 1998; 1999) provides a theoretical framework for understanding how word identification, visual processing, attention, and oculomotor control jointly determine when and where the eyes move during reading. In this article, we first review what is known about eye movements during reading. Then we provide an updated version of the model (E-Z Reader 7) and describe how it accounts for basic findings about eye movement control in reading. We then review several alternative models of eye movement control in reading, discussing both their core assumptions and their theoretical scope. On the basis of this discussion, we conclude that E-Z Reader provides the most comprehensive account of eye movement control during reading. Finally, we provide a brief overview of what is known about the neural systems that support the various components of reading, and suggest how the cognitive constructs of our model might map onto this neural architecture.

The E-Z Reader model (Reichle et al. 1998; 1999) provides a theoretical framework for understanding how word identification, visual processing, attention, and oculomotor control jointly determine when and where the eyes move during reading. In this article, we first review what is known about eye movements during reading. Then we provide an updated version of the model (E-Z Reader 7) and describe how it accounts for basic findings about eye movement control in reading. We then review several alternative models of eye movement control in reading, discussing both their core assumptions and their theoretical scope. On the basis of this discussion, we conclude that E-Z Reader provides the most comprehensive account of eye movement control during reading. Finally, we provide a brief overview of what is known about the neural systems that support the various components of reading, and suggest how the cognitive constructs of our model might map onto this neural architecture.

Summary The coat protein (CP) of Johnson grass mosaic potyvirus (JGMV) was analyzed for the possible presence of a disulfide (S-S) bridge between the two cysteine (Cys) moieties present in the core region of its CP. It was found that only half of the Cys residues present in the JGMV CP occurred as thiols (-SH) in preparations of isolated virions.

The paper contributes to the debate on the development and future of the CERIF model. In particular, it provides empirical elements to three questions: (a) How are existing CRIS projects connected to education systems? (b) Should the CERIF model be extended to education? (c) If so, how should this be done (entities, attributes, semantics)? The paper is based on a double methodology, an online survey with CERIF project managers and interviews with a panel of experts from euroCRIS. Survey and interviews have been carried out between February and April 2012. Results are indecisive – so far, the connection from research management systems to education related data seems not to be a priority, neither for the project managers nor for euroCRIS experts. When the systems are connected, simple data exchange between independent data silos appears to be the solution of choice. The results are discussed and perspectives for euroCRIS are suggested.

We assessed third and fifth graders' processing of parafoveal word information using a lexical decision task. On each trial, a preview word was first briefly presented parafoveally in the left or right visual field before a target word was displayed. Preview and target words could be identical, share the first three letters, or have no letters in common. Experiment 1 showed that developing readers receive the same word recognition benefit from parafoveal previews as expert readers. The impact of a change of case between preview and target in Experiment 2 showed that in all groups of readers, the preview benefit resulted from the identification of letters at an abstract level rather than from facilitation at a purely visual level. Fifth graders identified more letters from the preview than third graders. The results are interpreted within the framework of the interactive activation model. In particular, we suggest that although the processing of parafoveal information led to letter identification in developing readers, the processes involved may differ from those in expert readers. Although expert readers' processing of parafoveal information led to activation at the level of lexical representations, no such activation was observed in developing readers.