The role of the left perceptual span in L2 reading: An eye-tracking study

Reading is a very complex task that includes processing of words in the foveal area (the area of highest visual acuity, approximately 2 degrees of visual angle from the fixation) and in the parafoveal area (extending to approximately 5 degrees of visual angle). These two areas together represent what is known as the perceptual span in reading. A substantial amount of cognitive resources is required for processing the foveal area, leaving fewer cognitive resources available for processing the parafoveal area. Proficient first language (L1) readers (reading left to right) have a perceptual span of 3-4 characters to the left and of 14-5 characters to the right of the foveal fixation (Rayner, 1998). Given that second language (L2) processing requires even more cognitive resources (Kaan, 2014), it stands to reason that L2ers will have a smaller perceptual span than L1ers. It has even been suggested that L2ers might use a “risky reading strategy” (Fernandez, Allen, & Scheepers, 2020) typically found in older L1ers (Rayner et al, 2006). If L2ers adapt a risky reading strategy (to compensate for declines in lexical processing efficiency) we hypothesize they will have a smaller, more symmetrical perceptual span relative to L1ers, allowing them to make use of the left span to reconfirm what they previously read (or in some cases skipped).
In the current eye-tracking study, we directly test the symmetry of the perceptual span using the Gaze Contingent Moving Window Paradigm (McConkie & Rayner, 1975) and manipulate the amount of information available to both the left and right of the fixation (3, 6, 9 characters to the left and 3, 9, 15 characters to the right; see Table 1),. Additionally, we take into account the influence of Written Language Proficiency Skills (WLPS; combined reading proficiency and spelling skills) with German L1ers/English L2ers reading in English (n=28 so far). Furthermore, we compare the L2 data with L1ers of English (n=49; Veldre et al., 2020) using the same materials. Preliminary results suggest that both groups benefit from an increase of window size 3-6 to the left of fixation and from 3-9 to the right of fixation, with L1ers further benefiting from an increase in window size up to 15 characters to the right of the fixation. This suggests that L2ers have a smaller span overall, but both L1ers and L2ers show asymmetrical perceptual spans. Therefore, we do not find evidence of L2 readers using a “riskier reading strategy”. Overall, our data suggest that L2ers show a similar reading strategy to L1ers and while the L2 perceptual span is smaller, it is also asymmetric.