Readers Are Parallel Processors. Issue 7 (July 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Snell, Joshua; Grainger, Jonathan
• Is Part Of: Trends in cognitive sciences. Volume 23:Issue 7(2019)
• Page Start: 537
• Page End: 546
• Publication Date: 2019-07
• Subjects: reading -- parallel processing -- attention -- word position coding -- orthographic processing -- syntactic processing; Cognitive science -- Periodicals; Cognitive neuroscience -- Periodicals; 153.05
• DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2019.04.006
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1364-6613

Abstract

Abstract : Reading research has long endorsed the view that words are processed strictly one by one. The primary empirical test of this notion is the search for effects from upcoming words on readers' eye movements during sentence reading. Here we argue that no conclusions can be drawn from the absence of such effects, and that the serial versus parallel processing debate cannot be resolved without treading beyond the methodological scope of tracking eye movements. Recent considerations of how the brain organizes linguistic input have sparked key predictions in- and outside the realm of text reading, with ensuing research revealing phenomena that complicate the serial processing perspective. A case is made for parallelism, along with new methods to infer the cognitive architecture driving reading. Highlights: Whether words are processed serially or in parallel continues to be a major debate in reading research. In the past decade, many researchers have embraced the seriality assumption. This Opinion article shows that empirical findings were incorrectly thought to falsify parallel processing and that the seriality assumption works only if one treats the word recognition process as a black box. The newest model of text reading comprises true word recognition mechanisms, causing it to spark fresh predictions. Successful tests of these predictions cannot be harmonized with serial processing. Reading research is ready for a paradigm shift, both methodologically (treading beyond the measurement of eye movements in sentence reading) and theoretically (abandoning serial processing in favor of parallel processing).