Cover not available

In:Quantitative Methods in Multilingual Acquisition and Processing
Edited by Gabrielle Klassen and John W. Schwieter
[Research Methods in Applied Linguistics 16] 2026
► pp. 151–172

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Chapter 8
Using reaction and reading time techniques to study bi/multilingual sentence processing

Published online: 26 March 2026
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/rmal.16.08dem
Abstract
This chapter reviews the use of reading time and reaction time techniques to study sentence level comprehension in second-language learners and other bi/multilinguals. Techniques include grammaticality and acceptability judgment tasks (GJT/AJT), self-paced reading (SPR), and Maze tasks. Using examples from prior research, we will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using such techniques, and the types of questions that can be addressed using these methods. In addition, we will discuss issues related to methodology and the interpretation of data, such as spillover effects, power, and their implications for interpreting group differences
Article outline
  • 8.1Introduction
    • 8.1.1Types of questions that RT techniques can investigate
  • 8.2Judgment tasks
    • 8.2.1What are judgment tasks and what are they used for?
    • 8.2.2Examples of past research
      • 8.2.2.1L2 sentence processing
      • 8.2.2.2Crosslinguistic influence
    • 8.2.3The pros and cons of using judgment tasks
      in psycholinguistic research
  • 8.3Self-paced reading
    • 8.3.1What is self-paced reading and what is it used for?
    • 8.3.2Examples of past research
      • 8.3.2.1L2 sentence processing
      • 8.3.2.2Heritage speakers
      • 8.3.2.3Crosslinguistic influence
      • 8.3.2.4Code-switching
    • 8.3.4Pros and cons of using self-paced reading
  • 8.4Maze task
    • 8.4.1What it is and what it is used for
    • 8.4.2Examples of research using Maze tasks
    • 8.4.3Pros and cons of using the Maze task
  • 8.5Methodological issues
  • 8.6Conclusion
  • References
References (54)
References
Anwyl-Irvine, A., Dalmaijer, E. S., Hodges, N., & Evershed, J. K. (2021). Realistic precision and accuracy of online experiment platforms, web browsers, and devices. Behavior Research Methods, 53(4), 1407–1425. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anwyl-Irvine, A. L., Massonnié, J., Flitton, A., Kirkham, N., & Evershed, J. K. (2020). Gorilla in our midst: An online behavioral experiment builder. Behavior Research Methods, 52(1), 388–407. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1981). Second-language acquisition from a functionalist perspective: Pragmatic, semantic, and perceptual strategies. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 379(1), 190–214. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boyce, V., Futrell, R., & Levy, R. P. (2020). Maze made easy: Better and easier measurement of incremental processing difficulty. Journal of Memory and Language, 111, 104082. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M., & Stevens, M. (2018). Power analysis and effect size in mixed effects models: A tutorial. Journal of Cognition, 1(1), 9. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bultena, S., Dijkstra, T., & Van Hell, J. G. (2015). Language switch costs in sentence comprehension depend on language dominance: Evidence from self-paced reading. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(3), 453–469. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cheng, Y., Rothman, J., & Cunnings, I. (2022). Determiner-number specification and non-local agreement computation in L1 and L2 processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 51(4), 847–863. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006a). Continuity and shallow structures in language processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(1), 107–126. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006b). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(1), 3–42. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006c). How native-like is non-native language processing? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(12), 564–570. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cunnings, I. (2017a). Interference in native and non-native sentence processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(4), 712–721. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017b). Parsing and working memory in bilingual sentence processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(4), 659–678. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Oliveira, C. S. F., De Souza, R. A., & de Oliveira, F. L. P. (2017). Bilingualism effects on L1 representation and processing of argument structure. Journal of the European Second Language Association, 1(1), 23–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dussias, P. E., & Sagarra, N. (2007). The effect of exposure on syntactic parsing in Spanish–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(01), 101. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Enkin, E. (2012). The maze task: Training methods for second language learning. 19.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
FindingFive Team. (2023). FindingFive: An online platform for creating, running, and managing your experiments. [URL]
Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35(1), 116–124. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Forster, K. I., Guerrera, C., & Elliot, L. (2009). The maze task: Measuring forced incremental sentence processing time. Behavior Research Methods, 41(1), 163–171. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Freedman, S., & Forster, K. I. (1985). The psychological status of overgenerated sentences. Cognition, 19(2), 101–131. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fujita, H., & Cunnings, I. (2022). Interference and filler-gap dependency formation in native and non-native language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 48(5), 702–716. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68(1), 1–76. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Green, P., & MacLeod, C. J. (2016). simr: An R package for power analysis of generalized linear mixed models by simulation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 7(4), 493–498. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guo, J., Guo, T., Yan, Y., Jiang, N., & Peng, D. (2009). ERP evidence for different strategies employed by native speakers and L2 learners in sentence processing. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 22(2), 123–134. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Havik, E., Roberts, L., Van Hout, R., Schreuder, R., & Haverkort, M. (2009). Processing subject-object ambiguities in the L2: A self-paced reading study With German L2 learners of Dutch. Language Learning, 59(1), 73–112. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopp, H. (2010). Ultimate attainment in L2 inflection: Performance similarities between non-native and native speakers. Lingua, 120(4), 901–931. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
James, A. N., Fraundorf, S. H., Lee, E.-K., & Watson, D. G. (2018). Individual differences in syntactic processing: Is there evidence for reader-text interactions? Journal of Memory and Language, 102, 155–181. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jegerski, J., & Keating, G. D. (2023). Using self-paced reading in research with heritage speakers: A role for reading skill in the online processing of Spanish verb argument specifications. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1056561. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jensen, I. N., & Westergaard, M. (2023). Syntax matters: Exploring the effect of linguistic similarity in third language acquisition. Language Learning, 73(2), 374–402. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaan, E., Ballantyne, J. C., & Wijnen, F. (2015). Effects of reading speed on second-language sentence processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36(4), 799–830. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keating, G. D., & Jegerski, J. (2015). Experimental designs in sentence processing and research: A methodological review and user’s guide. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37(1), 1–32. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kumle, L., Võ, M. L.-H., & Draschkow, D. (2021). Estimating power in (generalized) linear mixed models: An open introduction and tutorial in R. Behavior Research Methods, 53(6), 2528–2543. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kupisch, T., & Rothman, J. (2018). Terminology matters! Why difference is not incompleteness and how early child bilinguals are heritage speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism, 22(5), 564–582. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, E.-K. R., & Phillips, C. (2022). Why non-native speakers sometimes outperform native speakers in agreement processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1–13. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Litcofsky, K. A., & Van Hell, J. G. (2017). Switching direction affects switching costs: Behavioral, ERP and time-frequency analyses of intra-sentential codeswitching. Neuropsychologia, 97, 112–139. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marsden, E., Thompson, S., & Plonsky, L. (2018). A methodological synthesis of self-paced reading in second language research. Applied Psycholinguistics, 39(5), 861–904. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mertzen, D., Lago, S., & Vasishth, S. (2021). The benefits of preregistration for hypothesis-driven bilingualism research. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 24(5), 807–812. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paape, D., & Vasishth, S. (2022). Is reanalysis selective when regressions are consciously controlled? Glossa Psycholinguistics, 1(1). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peirce, J., Gray, J. R., Simpson, S., MacAskill, M., Höchenberger, R., Sogo, H., Kastman, E., & Lindeløv, J. K. (2019). PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior Research Methods, 51(1), 195–203. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Polinsky, M., & Scontras, G. (2020). Understanding heritage languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(1), 4–20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prystauka, Y., Altmann, G. T. M., & Rothman, J. (2023). Online eye tracking and real-time sentence processing: On opportunities and efficacy for capturing psycholinguistic effects of different magnitudes and diversity. Behavior Research Methods. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Psychology Software Tools, Inc. [E-Prime 3.0]. (2016). Retrieved from [URL]
Rhode, D. (2001–2003). Linger. [URL]
Roberts, L., & Felser, C. (2011). Plausibility and recovery from garden paths in second language sentence processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32(2), 299–331. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sorace, A. (2011). Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1(1), 1–33. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swets, B., Desmet, T., Clifton, C., & Ferreira, F. (2008). Underspecification of syntactic ambiguities: Evidence from self-paced reading. Memory & Cognition, 36(1), 201–216. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomczak, J., Gordon, A., Adams, J., Pickering, J. S., Hodges, N., & Evershed, J. K. (2023). What over 1,000,000 participants tell us about online research protocols. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 17, 1228365. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Dyke, J. (2003). Distinguishing effects of structure and decay on attachment and repair: A cue-based parsing account of recovery from misanalyzed ambiguities. Journal of Memory and Language, 49(3), 285–316. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vasishth, S., & Nicenboim, B. (2016). Statistical methods for linguistic research: Foundational ideas — part I. Language and Linguistics Compass, 10(8), 349–369. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wang, X. (2015). Language control in bilingual language comprehension: Evidence from the maze task. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weissman, D. H., Jiang, J., & Egner, T. (2014). Determinants of congruency sequence effects without learning and memory confounds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(5), 2022–2037. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Witzel, J., & Witzel, N. (2021). Relative clause processing in L1 and L2 English: A maze task investigation. Journal of Second Language Studies, 4(2), 327–352. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Witzel, N., Witzel, J., & Forster, K. (2012). Comparisons of online reading paradigms: Eye tracking, moving-window, and maze. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 41(2), 105–128. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zehr, J., & Schwarz, F. (2018). PennController for Internet Based Experiments (IBEX). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue