探討以英文為第二語言或外語的文獻，揭示字彙能力與背景知識是閱讀理解的重要因素，然而在研究方法上多採用事後回憶或理解測驗方式，對於即時的閱讀歷程仍所知有限。本研究對象是中央大學的大學生，研究一探討低頻字的唸讀速度、正確性與字彙能力的關係，結果發現唸讀的正確性與瞭解字義之間有較高之相關。研究二依據研究一結果以唸讀的正確性區分字彙能力高低組，並依受試者的系別背景區分非自然科學系組與自然科學系組，以時間性與空間點紀錄皆較為細緻的眼動追蹤技術，探討不同字彙能力與背景知識讀者閱讀科學類文章的眼動型態。
整體的眼動資料顯示字彙能力是影響閱讀的關鍵因素，但未能顯現背景知識的效果。本研究主要發現字彙能力較高讀者的閱讀速度較快，眼睛向前與往回的凝視時間較短，而且回視率較低；相對而言，字彙能力較低讀者的閱讀速度較慢，眼睛向前與往回的凝視時間較長，並且有較高的回視率。此外，進行重複閱讀的讀者顯現閱讀效益，即在第二次閱讀時，眼睛向前與往回的凝視時間較短、凝視次數較少、以及向前移動的距離較長。研究結果與英文為第一語言文獻相較，發現以英文為外語的大學生之閱讀速度較慢、凝視時間較長、眼睛移動距離較短、回視率較高、並且在功能字的凝視比例較高。

Given the fact that lexical ability and background knowledge play crucial roles in second language reading and yet less information is available for on-line reading processes, much empirical research is needed. In Study 1, 60 students of National Central University were tested in a read-aloud task. The results suggested that indices of both speed and accuracy significantly correlated with lexical ability, and accuracy could best represent for lexical ability. In Study 2, subjects'' eye movements were monitored as they read scientific texts. The results indicated that lexical ability influenced the on-line reading processes, but background knowledge did not. Readers with higher lexical ability read faster, their forward and backward fixation duration was faster, and the regression rate was smaller. In addition, when subjects read twice, they had much reduced reading time, less fixations and longer forward saccade length in the second round. There was reading benefit. Overall, the eye movements of EFL college readers were quantitatively different from those of English native college readers.

陳郁夫，羅明，蔡方之，高千惠，曾昱翔和胡志偉（民93）。從眼動資料看讀者
背景知識對其閱讀歷程的影響。第43屆台灣心理學年會會議手冊暨會議論
文摘要。台北市：政治大學。
張靜維（民94）。從眼動資料探討字形與聲旁在篇章閱讀的效果。國立中央大學
學習與教學所碩士論文。
鄭恆雄（民91）。前言：大學入學考試中心<高中英文參考詞彙表>之編輯方法及
原則。網址http://www.ceec.edu.tw/Research/ce23/ce23.htm。
戴子傑（民92）。從字義到閱讀理解：以竹北高中學生為例。國立台灣師範大學
英語研究所碩士論文。
Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Alderson, J. C., & Urquhart, A. H. (1988). This test is unfair: I’m not an economist. Chapter 12 (pp.168-182) in P. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive Approaches to Second Language Reading. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Barnett, M. A. (1989). More than meets the eye: Foreign language reading. Language in Education: Theory and Practice, no. 73. Cal/ERIC Series on Language and Linguistics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Bell, L. C., & Perfetti, C. A. (1994). Reading skills: Some adult comparisons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 244-255.
Carrell, P. L. (1983). Three components of background knowledge in reading
comprehension. Language Learning, 33(2),183-207.
Carrell, P. L. (1988). Some causes of text-boundedness and schema interference in ESL reading. Chapter 7 (pp.101-113) in P. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive Approaches to Second Language Reading. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1983). What your eyes do while your mind is reading. In K. Rayner (Ed.), Eye movements in Reading: Perceptual and language
processes (pp.275-307). New York: Academic Press.
Carver, R. P. (1973). Reading as reasoning: Implications for measurement. In W. H. MacGinitie (Ed.), Assessment problems in reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Chincotta, D., Hyönä, J., Underwood, G.. (1997). Eye fixations, speech rate and bilingual digit span: Numeral reading indexes fluency not word length. Acta Psychologica, 253-275.
Chu, H. C. (2002). Inference generation in text memory: Effects of Rhetorical
convention, content familiarity, and grade level. English Teaching & Learning, 26(3), 59-78.
Goodman, K. S. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist, 6, 126-135.
Graesser, A. C., Hauft-Smith, K., Cohen, A. D., & Pyles, L. D. (1980). Advanced outlines, familiarity, text genre, and retention of prose. Journal of Experimental Education, 48, 209-221.
Inhoff, A. W., & Rayner, K. (1986). Parafoveal word processing during eye fixations in reading: Effects of word frequency. Perception & Psychophysics, 40, 431-439.
Juhasz, B. J, & Rayner, K. (2003). Investigating the effects of a set of intercorrelated variables on eye fixation durations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29(6), 1312-1318.
Just, M. A.,＆ Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixation to comprehension. Psychological Review, Vol 87, No 4, 329-354.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1987). The psychology of reading and language
comprehension. Boston, MA:Allyn & Bacon.
Kaakinen, J. K., Hyönä, J., & Keenan, J. M. (2003). How prior knowledge, WMC,
and relevance of information affect eye fixations in expository text. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29(3), 447-457.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A
construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.
Kintsch, W. & Franzke, M. (1995). The role of background knowledge in the recall of a news story. Chapter 17 (pp.321-333) in R. F. Lorch, & E. J. O’Brien. (Eds.), Sources of coherence in reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kintsch, W. (2005). An overview of top-down and bottom-up effects in
comprehension: The CI perspective. Discourse Process, 39, 125-128.
Laufer, B. & Sim, D. D. (1985). Measuring and explaining the reading threshold
needed for English for academic purposes texts. Foreign Language Annals,
18(5), 405-413.
Lefton, L. A., Nagle, R. J., Johnson, G., & Fisher, D. F. (1979). Eye movement
dynamics of good and poor readers: Then and now. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11(4), 319-328.
Liu, N., & Nation, I. S. P. (1985). Factors affecting guessing vocabulary in context. Singapore SEAMEO Regional Language Centre: RELC Journal, 16(1), 33-42.
Nassaji, H. (2003). Higher-level and lower-level text processing skills in advanced ESL reading comprehension. The Modern Language Journal, 87, 261-276.
Raney, G. E., & Rayner, K. (1995). Word frequency effects and eye movements during two readings of a text. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49(2), 151-172.
Raney, G. E., Therriault, D. J. & Minkoff S. R. B. (2000). Repetition effects from paraphrased text: Evidence for an integrated representation model of text representation. Discourse Processes, 29(1), 61-81.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movement in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 24, 372-422.
Rayner, K., & Duffy, S. A. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory & Cognition, 14, 191-201.
Rayner, K., & Juhasz, B. J. (2004). Eye movement in reading: Old questions and new directions. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16, 340-352.
Rayner, K., & McConkie, G. W. (1976). What guides a reader’s eye movements?
Vision Research, 16, 829-837.
Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1989). The psychology of reading. NJ: Englewood Cliffs.
Rayner, K., & Sereno, J. (1994). Eye movements in reading. In M. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 57-81). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Schmauder, A. R., Morris, R. K., & Poynor, D. V. (2000). Lexical processing and text integration of function and content words: Evidence from priming and eye fixations. Memory & Cognition, 28(7), 1098-1108.
Segalowitz, S. J., Segalowitz, N., & Wood, A. (1998). Assessing the development of automaticity in second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 53-67.
Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96(4), 523-568.
Snow, A. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. National Research Council.
Williams, R. S. & Morris, R. K. (2004). Eye movements, word familiarity and
vocabulary acquisition. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16, 312-339.
Wolf, M. & Katzir-Cohen, T. (2001). Reading fluency and its intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 211-239.