{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02494802494802495, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002772002772002772, 'mean_word_length': 5.9423076923076925, '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}}
Qualitative Descriptions of Error Recovery Patterns Across Reading Level and Sentence Type: An Eye Movement Analysis

Purposes of the present study included describing a variety of error recovery patterns based on eye movement (EM) measures of sentence parsing across reading level and error type. A qualitative pattern analysis of EM mappings was completed for students with reading disabilities (n = 10) and nondisabled students (n = 10) who were parsing control and erred sentences. Independent variables included error type (syntactically ambiguous, semantically anomalous, and control sentences) and reading proficiency level. Dependent variables consisted of seven eye movement measures. Chi-square analyses were performed to examine group differences across frequencies per pattern. Results suggest that the error recovery strategies deployed by both groups were similar in pattern and frequency; patterns were largely organized, strategic, and efficient, as predicted. Evidence for seven newly defined strategies was found, with indications of multiple strategies within sentences by both groups. Strategies tended to be error "reanalysis" (vs. "recovery") heuristics, in that readers from both groups used regressions to reanalyze regions of inconsistency rather than regions of disambiguation. Earlier conclusions regarding disorganized processing and individual differences among adolescents with reading disabilities are discussed.