Contributions of reader- and text-level characteristics to eye-movement patterns during passage reading.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present research presents a novel method for investigating how characteristics of texts (words, sentences, and passages) and individuals (verbal and general cognitive skills) jointly influence eye-movement patterns over the time-course of reading, as well as comprehension accuracy. Fifty-one proficient readers read passages of varying complexity from the Gray Oral Reading Test, while their eye-movements were recorded. Participants also completed a large battery of tests assessing various components of reading comprehension ability (vocabulary size, decoding, phonological awareness, and experience with print), as well as general cognitive and executive skills. We used the Random Forests nonparametric regression technique to simultaneously estimate relative importance of all predictors. This method enabled us to trace the temporal engagement of individual predictors and entire predictor groups on eye-movements during reading, while avoiding the problems of model overfitting and collinearity, typical of parametric regression methods. Our findings both confirmed well-established results of prior research and pointed to a space of hypotheses that is as yet unexplored. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it