Comparing Eye-Tracking and Verbal Reports in L2 Reading Process Research: Three Qualitative Studies

This study compares the roles of eye-tracking and verbal reports (think-alouds and retrospective verbal reports, RVRs) in L2 reading process research through three qualitative studies. Findings indicate that eye-tracking provided precise, quantitative data on visual attention and reading patterns (e.g., fixation duration, gaze plots) and choice-making during gap-filling. Based on our mapping, it was mostly effective in identifying 13 out of 47 reading processing strategies, primarily those involving skimming or scanning that had distinctive eye-movement signatures. Verbal reports, while less exact in measurement, offered direct access to cognitive processes (e.g., strategy use, reasoning) and uncovered content-specific thoughts inaccessible to eye-tracking. Both methods exhibited reactivity: eye-tracking could cause physical discomfort or altered reading behavior, whereas think-alouds could disrupt task flow or enhance reflection. This study reveals the respective strengths and limitations of eye-tracking and verbal reports in L2 reading research. It facilitates a more informed selection and application of these methodological approaches in alignment with specific research objectives, whether employed in isolation or in an integrated manner.