Eye movement control in reading: accounting for initial fixation locations and refixations within the E-Z Reader model

Reilly and O’Regan (1998, Vision Research, 38, 303–317) used computer simulations to evaluate how well several different word-targeting strategies could account for results which show that the distributions of fixation locations in reading are systematically related to low-level oculomotor variables, such as saccade distance and launch site [McConkie, Kerr, Reddix & Zola, (1988). Vision Research, 28, 1107–1118]. Their simulation results suggested that fixation locations are primarily determined by word length information, and that the processing of language, such as the identification of words, plays only a minimal role in deciding where to move the eyes. This claim appears to be problematic for our model of eye movement control in reading, E-Z Reader [Rayner, Reichle & Pollatsek (1998). Eye movement control in reading: an overview and model. In G. Underwood, Eye guidance in reading and scene perception (pp. 243–268). Oxford, UK: Elsevier; Reichle, Pollatsek, Fisher & Rayner (1998). Psychological Re6iew, 105, 125–157], because it assumes that lexical access is the engine that drives the eyes forward during reading. However, we show that a newer version of E-Z Reader which still assumes that lexical access is the engine driving eye movements also predicts the locations of fixations and within-word refixations, and therefore provides a viable framework for understanding how both linguistic and oculomotor variables affect eye movements in reading. © 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved