Cover not available

Article published In: Australian Review of Applied Linguistics: Online-First Articles

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

Eye-tracking insights into cognitive mechanisms in L2 reading

The differential roles of working memory and comprehension monitoring across proficiency levels

ORCiD logo with link | University of Isfahan
 | University of Isfahan
Published online: 3 November 2026
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.26014.mah
Abstract
This study investigates the differential roles of working memory (WM) and comprehension monitoring (CM) in predicting L2 reading comprehension among Persian EFL learners across beginner and advanced proficiency levels. Utilizing a sample of 80 participants, comprising 40 beginners and 40 advanced learners, various cognitive measures including a Reading Span Test (RST), an Eye-movement Inconsistency Detection Task (measuring gaze durations), and a reading test (RT) were employed to assess working memory capacity (WMC), comprehension monitoring, and reading performance. Group differences were examined using univariate and multivariate analyses, and a hierarchical multiple regression was conducted using the full sample to examine the predictive contributions of WMC and CM and their interactions with proficiency group. The results indicated that while both WM and CM are integral to L2 reading comprehension, their relative contributions differ significantly between beginner and advanced learners. While WM plays a crucial role in L2 reading comprehension among beginners, comprehension monitoring becomes more predictive for advanced learners. Specifically, beginner learners with higher WM capacity demonstrated better reading performance. In contrast, advanced learners benefited significantly from effective comprehension monitoring, as evidenced by longer gaze durations correlating with higher reading scores. The study offers insights into the cognitive mechanisms underlying L2 reading and highlights the need for proficiency-specific instructional approaches, with implications for theory, practice, and future research.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Literature review
    • Working memory, processing demands, and L2 reading
    • Comprehension monitoring and reading
    • Current study
  • Method
    • Participants
    • Materials
      • The IELTS test
      • The reading span test (RST)
      • The eye-movement inconsistency detection task
      • The reading test (RT)
    • Procedure and apparatus
    • Data analysis
  • Results
    • Descriptive statistics
    • Between-group comparisons
    • Multiple regression analysis
  • Discussion
  • Limitations and future directions
  • Conclusion and implications
  • Declaration of contributions from Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process
  • References
References (95)
References
Abu-Rabia, S. (1995). Learning to read in Arabic: Reading, syntactic, orthographic and working memory skills in normally achieving and poor Arabic readers. Reading Psychology: An International Quarterly, 16(4), 351–394. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ahmadian, M. J. (2020). Explicit and implicit instruction of refusal strategies: Does working memory capacity play a role? Language Teaching Research, 24(2), 163–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anderson, N. J. (2008). Active skills for reading: Books 1–4. Heinle.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Active skills for reading 3. Cengage Learning.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. J. (2007). Working memory: Past, present and future? In N. Osaka, R. Logie, & M. D’Esposito (Eds.), The cognitive neuroscience of working memory. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baker, L. (1984). Spontaneous versus instructed use of multiple standards for evaluation comprehension: Effects of age, reading proficiency, and type of standard. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,38, 289–311. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1985). How do we know when we don’t understand? Standards for evaluating comprehension. In D. Forrest-Pressley, G. McKinnon, & T. Waller (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition and human performance (pp. 155–205). Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984b). Metacognitive skills and reading. In D. P. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 353–394). Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bernhardt, E. B. (1991). Reading development in a second language: Theoretical, research, and classroom perspectives. Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bernhardt, E. (2005). Progress and procrastination in second language reading. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 133–150. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior research methods, 41(4), 977–990. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Butterfuss, R., & Kendeou, P. (2018). The role of executive functions in reading comprehension. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 801–826. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cain, K. & Oakhill, J. (2006). Assessment matters: Issues in the measurement of reading comprehension. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 697–708. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children’s reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carretti, B., Borella, E., & De Beni, R. (2007). Does strategic memory training improve the working memory performance of younger and older adults? Experimental Psychology, 54(4), 311–320. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cartwright, K. B., Lee, S. A., Taboada Barber, A., DeWyngaert, L. U., Lane, A. B., & Singleton, T. (2020). Contributions of executive function and cognitive intrinsic motivation to university students’ reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(3), 345–369. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chang, X., Wang, P., Cai, M. M., & Wang, M. (2019). The predictive power of working memory on Chinese middle school students’ English reading comprehension. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 35(5), 458–472. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Casanave, C. P. (1988). Comprehension monitoring in ESL reading: A neglected essential. TESOL Quarterly, 22(2), 283–302. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Connor, C. M., Radach, R., Vorstius, C., Day, S. L., McLean, L., & Morrison, F. J. (2015). Individual differences in fifth graders’ literacy and academic language predict comprehension monitoring development: An eye-movement study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19(2), 114–134. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Conway, A. R., Kane, M. J., Bunting, M. F., Hambrick, D. Z., Wilhelm, O., & Engle, R. W. (2005). Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 769–786. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cottrell, G. W. (1985). A connectionist approach to word sense disambiguation. University of Rochester.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Currie, N. K., & Cain, K. (2015). Children’s inference generation: The role of vocabulary and working memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 137, 57–75. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Currie, N. K., & Muijselaar, M. M. (2019). Inference making in young children: The concurrent and longitudinal contributions of verbal working memory and vocabulary. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(8), 1416. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(4), 450–466. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Day, R. R., & Park, J. S. (2005). Developing reading comprehension questions. Reading in a Foreign Language, 17 (1), 60–73. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Bruïne, A., Jolles, D., & van den Broek, P. (2021). Minding the load or loading the mind: The effect of manipulating working memory on coherence monitoring. Journal of Memory and Language, 118, Article 104212. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (Ed.). (2007). Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dirix, N., Brysbaert, M., & Duyck, W. (2019). How well do word recognition measures correlate? Effects of language context and repeated presentations. Behavior Research Methods, 51, 2800–2816. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duffy, S. A., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 27(4), 429–446. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., & Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working memory. Psychological Review, 102(2), 211. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
George, M. S., Mannes, S., & Hoffman, J. E. (1997). Individual differences in inference generation: An ERP analysis. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9(6), 776–787. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goring, S. A., Schmank, C. J., Kane, M. J., & Conway, A. R. (2021). Psychometric models of individual differences in reading comprehension: A reanalysis of Freed, Hamilton, and Long (2017). Journal of Memory and Language, 119, 104221. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grabe, W. & Stoller, F. L. (2011). Teaching and researching reading (2nd Ed.). Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ha, H. (2021). Exploring the relationships between various dimensions of receptive vocabulary knowledge and L2 listening and reading comprehension. Language Testing in Asia, 11, 1–20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harvey, J. (2025). Exploring the impact of working memory capacity on academic reading and achievement in South African Online Tertiary Students. Reading Psychology, 46(3), 271–293. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopp, H. (2014). Working memory effects in the L2 processing of ambiguous relative clauses. Language Acquisition, 21(3), 250–278. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hudson, T. (2007). Teaching second language reading. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
In’nami, Y., Hijikata, Y., & Koizumi, R. (2022). Working memory capacity and L2 reading: a meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 44(2), 381–406. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jung, J. (2018). Effects of task complexity and working memory capacity on L2 reading comprehension. System, 74, 21–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Just, M., & Carpenter, P. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99, 122–149. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kendeou, P., Van Den Broek, P., Helder, A., & Karlsson, J. (2014). A cognitive view of reading comprehension: Implications for reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(1), 10–16. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Khonamri, F., & Mahmoudi Kojidi, E. (2011). Metacognitive awareness and comprehension monitoring in reading ability of Iranian EFL learners. Profile Issues in Teachers Professional Development, 13(2), 99–111.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Y.-S., & Phillips, B. (2014). Cognitive correlates of listening comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 49, 269–281. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Y. S. G., Vorstius, C., & Radach, R. (2018). Does online comprehension monitoring make a unique contribution to reading comprehension in beginning readers? Evidence from eye movements. Scientific Studies of Reading, 22(5), 367–383. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kinnunen, R., & Vauras, M. (2010). Tracking online metacognition: Monitoring and regulating comprehension in reading. In A. Efklides & P. Misailidi (Eds.), Trends and prospects in metacognition research (pp. 209–258). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A framework for cognition. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kurby, C. A., & Zacks, J. M. (2012). Starting from scratch and building brick by brick in comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 40(5), 812–826. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, S., Li, N., Zhang, X., Wang, L. C. A., & Liu, D. (2025). Effects of working memory and visual search skill on Chinese reading comprehension: Examining the simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 38(2), 329–351. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, X., Wang, W., & Wang, H. (2019). Age differences in the effect of animacy on Mandarin sentence processing. PeerJ, 7 (e6437), 1–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lockiewicz, M., & Jaskulska, M. (2015). Mental lexicon, working memory and L2 (English) vocabulary in Polish students with and without dyslexia. CEPS Journal, 5(1), 71–89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mahshanian, A. (2026a). Reading architecture I: Constructs, processes, and theoretical taxonomies. In A. Mahshanian (Ed.), Reading architecture: From constructs to paradigms of comprehension (Vol. 85, pp. 1–22). Elsevier. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2026b). Reading architecture II: From unidirectional to interactive models. In A. Mahshanian (Ed.), Reading architecture: From constructs to paradigms of comprehension (Vol. 85, pp. 2–50). Elsevier. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2023). The relationship between working memory, lower- and higher-level reading processes, and L2 reading ability [PhD Dissertation]. University of Isfahan.
Mahshanian, A., & Shahnazari, M. (2026). Cognitive Pathways in Reading: Theoretical Developments from Interactive Models to the Multiple-Processing Account. Applied Research on English Language, 175–198. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mahshanian, A., Shahnazari, M., & Moinzadeh, A. (2023). The contribution of working memory and word recognition to second language reading across different proficiency levels: An eye-movement study. Teaching English Language, 17(2), 213–250. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2025a). Investigating the Relationship between working memory, semantic encoding, and L2 reading ability across proficiency levels. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 55(1), 63–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2025b). Does reading performance vary according to available working memory capacity and syntactic parsing skills? Teaching English as a Second Language Electronic Journal (TESL-EJ), 28(4), 1–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McNamara, D. S., & Scott, J. L. (2001). Working memory capacity and strategy use. Memory & Cognition, 29, 10–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miyake, A., Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1994). A capacity approach to syntactic comprehension disorders: Making normal adults perform like aphasic patients. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 11(6), 671–717. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. (1998). Individual differences in second language proficiency: Working memory as language aptitude. In A. F. Healy & L. E. Bourne (Eds.), Foreign language learning: Psycholinguistic Studies on Training and Retention (pp. 339–364). Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nakamura, M., & Rossi, E. (2025). Differential effects of working memory constraints on syntactic and semantic processing: Evidence from ERPs. Brain and Language, 264, 105550. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2014). The role and importance of lower-level processes in second language reading. Language Teaching, 47(1), 1–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nowbakht, M. (2019). The role of working memory, language proficiency, and learners’ age in second language English learners’ processing and comprehension of anaphoric sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 48(2), 353–370. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oakhill, J., Hartt, J., & Samols, D. (2005). Levels of comprehension monitoring and working memory in good and poor comprehenders. Reading and Writing, 18, 657–686. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oakhill, J., & Cain, K. (2012). The precursors of reading ability in young readers: evidence from a four-year longitudinal study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16, 91–121. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Osaka, M., & Osaka, N. (1992). Language-independent working memory as measured by Japanese and English reading span tests. Bulletin of Psychonomic Society, 30, 287–289. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paris, S. G. & Myers, M. (1981). Comprehension monitoring, memory and study strategies of good and poor readers. Journal of Reading Behavior, 13, 5–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perfetti, C. A. (1988). Verbal efficiency in reading ability. In M. Daneman, G. E. Mackinnon, & T. G. Waller (Eds), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice (pp. 109–143). Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quaid, E. (2018). Reviewing the IELTS speaking test in East Asia: theoretical and practice-based insights. Language Testing in Asia, 8 (1), 2. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reichle, E. D., Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (2000). The neural bases of strategy and skill in sentence–picture verification. Cognitive Psychology, 40(4), 261–295. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sagarra, N., & Herschensohn, J. (2010). The role of proficiency and working memory in gender and number agreement processing in L1 and L2 Spanish. Lingua, 120 (8), 2022–2039. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rezaei, A., & Mousanezhad Jeddi, E. (2020). The contributions of attentional control components, phonological awareness, and working memory to reading ability. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 49(1), 31–40. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shin, J. (2020). A meta-analysis of the relationship between working memory and second language reading comprehension: Does task type matter? Applied Psycholinguistics, 41(4), 873–900. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Silverman, R. D., Speece, D. L., Harring, J. R., & Ritchey, K. D. (2013). Fluency has a role in the simple view of reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17(2), 108–133. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 402–433. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swanson, H. L. (2003). Age-related differences in learning disabled and skilled readers’ working memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 85(1), 1–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Temelman-Yogev, L., Prior, A., & Katzir, T. (2024). Comprehension monitoring across languages–The effect of online feedback. Learning and Instruction, 92, 101928. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Temelman-Yogev, L., Katzir, T., & Prior, A. (2020). Monitoring comprehension in a foreign language: Trait or skill? Metacognition and Learning, 15, 343–365. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tibken, C., Richter, T., Wannagat, W., Schmiedeler, S., von der Linden, N., & Schneider, W. (2022). Measuring comprehension monitoring with the inconsistency task in adolescents: Stability, associations with reading comprehension skills, and differences between grade levels. Discourse Processes, 59(5–6), 439–461. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tibken, C., Richter, T., & Wannagat, W. (2024). Metacognitive comprehension monitoring: Cognitive abilities explain performance differences between younger and older adults. Scientific Studies of Reading, 28(3), 284–302. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van der Schoot, M., Reijntjes, A., & van Lieshout, E. C. (2012). How do children deal with inconsistencies in text? An eye fixation and self-paced reading study in good and poor reading comprehenders. Reading and Writing, 25, 1665–1690. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Dyke, J. A., Johns, C. L., & Kukona, A. (2014). Low working memory capacity is only spuriously related to poor reading comprehension. Cognition, 131, 373–403. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Villanueva, J. M. (2022). Language profile, metacognitive reading strategies, and reading comprehension performance among college students. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2061683. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verhoeven, L., & Perfetti, C. A. (2011). Morphological processing in reading acquisition: A cross-linguistic perspective. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32(3), 457–466. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heidari Vincheh, M., Mirzaei, A., & Roohani, A. (2024). A cognitive diagnostic approach to IELTS speaking test: unveiling the subskills and test-takers’ perceptions. Language Testing in Asia, 14(1), 1–21. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walczyk, J. J. (1995). Testing a compensatory-encoding model. Reading Research Quarterly 30, 396–408. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000). The interplay between automatic and control processes in reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(4), 554–566. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walczyk, J. J., & Griffith-Ross, D. A. (2007). How important is reading skill fluency for comprehension? The Reading Teacher, 60(6), 560–569. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Waters, G., & Caplan, D. (1996). The capacity theory of sentence comprehension: Critique of Just & Carpenter (1992). Psychological Review, 103, 761–772. 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, 105–128. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yeomans-Maldonado, G. (2017). Development of comprehension monitoring in beginner readers. Reading and Writing, 30, 2039–2067. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. A., & Brown, C. M. (1996). The influence of language proficiency and comprehension skill on situation-model construction. Discourse processes, 21(3), 289–327. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zargar, E., Adams, A. M., & Connor, C. M. (2020). The relations between children’s comprehension monitoring and their reading comprehension and vocabulary knowledge: an eye-movement study. Reading and Writing, 33(3), 511–545. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold-dark jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold-light jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold prag Twitter_Logo_Blue