Abstract
BACKGROUND: Eye movements reflect the cognitive-linguistic processing of neurotypical readers. Numerous reading related eye movement measures are associated with language processing, including first fixation duration, gaze duration, number of fixations, word skipping, and regressions. Eye movements have also been used to examine reading in neuro-atypical populations including persons with aphasia (PWA). AIMS: This study aimed to determine whether eye movement measures obtained from connected text reading differ among persons with varying types of aphasia and neurotypical individuals, as well as whether eye movement measures are associated with language processing severity and reading comprehension ability in PWA. METHODS: Twenty-four PWA and twenty-four age-matched control participants completed a connected text-reading eye-tracking task. The PWA also completed assessments to evaluate overall language processing severity and reading comprehension skills and to identify specific subtypes of aphasia. RESULTS: Persons with aphasia had shorter gaze duration, longer regression duration, and made more fixations than control participants, while no group differences emerged for first fixation duration or word skipping. Eye movement patterns did not differ among participants with anomic, Broca's, or conduction/Wernicke's. Language severity scores were a significant factor for gaze duration, while reading comprehension scores were not a significant factor for the eye movement measures examined. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support previous eye tracking literature that indicate different eye movement patterns for persons with aphasia during text reading relative to neurotypical controls. The findings also highlight that the selection of eye movement measures examined, the stimuli used, and procedural considerations may impact the pattern of results. The results from this study can be used to further determine which eye movement measures may be most suited for studying language processing during reading in neuro-atypical individuals and determine whether persons with aphasia use different strategies for reading comprehension than neurotypical individuals.