IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0254546.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing predictors of sentence self-paced reading times: Syntactic complexity versus transitional probability metrics

Author

Listed:
  • Bob Kapteijns
  • Florian Hintz

Abstract

When estimating the influence of sentence complexity on reading, researchers typically opt for one of two main approaches: Measuring syntactic complexity (SC) or transitional probability (TP). Comparisons of the predictive power of both approaches have yielded mixed results. To address this inconsistency, we conducted a self-paced reading experiment. Participants read sentences of varying syntactic complexity. From two alternatives, we selected the set of SC and TP measures, respectively, that provided the best fit to the self-paced reading data. We then compared the contributions of the SC and TP measures to self-paced reading times when entered into the same model. Our results showed that while both measures explained significant portions of variance in reading times (over and above control variables: word/sentence length, word frequency and word position) when included in independent models, their contributions changed drastically when SC and TP were entered into the same model. Specifically, we only observed significant effects of TP. We conclude that in our experiment the control variables explained the bulk of variance. When comparing the small effects of SC and TP, the effects of TP appear to be more robust.

Suggested Citation

  • Bob Kapteijns & Florian Hintz, 2021. "Comparing predictors of sentence self-paced reading times: Syntactic complexity versus transitional probability metrics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(7), pages 1-21, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0254546
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254546
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0254546
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0254546&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0254546?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0254546. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.