{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01950354609929078, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.720238095238095, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Validation: Knowledge- and Text-Based Monitoring During Reading

ABSTRACT To create a coherent and correct mental representation of a text, readers must validate incoming information; they must monitor information for consistency with the preceding text and their background knowledge. The current study aims to contrast text- and knowledge-based monitoring to investigate their unique influences on processing and whether validation is passive or reader-initiated. Therefore, we collected reading times in a self-paced experiment using expository texts containing information that conflicts with either the preceding text or readers’ background knowledge. Results show that text- and knowledge-based monitoring have different time courses and that working memory affects only knowledge-based monitoring. Furthermore, our results suggest that validation could occur at different levels of processing and perhaps draw on different mixes of passive and reader-initiated processes. These results contribute to our understanding of monitoring during reading and of how different sources of information can influence such monitoring.