ArticleFrontiers in psychology2020
What Is the Difference? Rereading Shakespeare's Sonnets -An Eye Tracking Study.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the rereading effect of digital reading through eye movements using artificial neural networks.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Predicting subjective ratings of affect and comprehensibility with text features: a reader response study of narrative poetry.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- The Effects of Emotional Design on Multimedia Learning and Appreciation of Chinese Poetry.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Micropoetry Meets Neurocognitive Poetics: Influence of Associations on the Reception of Poetry.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Eye movements and mental imagery during reading of literary texts with different narrative styles.Journal of eye movement research · 2020Article
- Rhythmic subvocalization: An eye-tracking study on silent poetry reading.Journal of eye movement research · 2020Article
- Reading Russian poetry: An expert-novice study.Journal of eye movement research · 2020Article
- Sentiment Analysis of Children and Youth Literature: Is There a Pollyanna Effect?Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Texts are often reread in everyday life, but most studies of rereading have been based on expository texts, not on literary ones such as poems, though literary texts may be reread more often than others. To correct this bias, the present study is based on two of Shakespeare's sonnets. Eye movements were recorded, as participants read a sonnet then read it again after a few minutes. After each reading, comprehension and appreciation were measured with the help of a questionnaire. In general, compared to the first reading, rereading improved the fluency of reading (shorter total reading times, shorter regression times, and lower fixation probability) and the depth of comprehension. Contrary to the other rereading studies using literary texts, no increase in appreciation was apparent. Moreover, results from a predictive modeling analysis showed that readers' eye movements were determined by the same critical psycholinguistic features throughout the two sessions. Apparently, even in the case of poetry, the eye movement control in reading is determined mainly by surface features of the text, unaffected by repetition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.