Updating Situation Models From Descriptive Texts: A Test of the Situational Operator Model

A model of situation model construction suitable for descriptive text, called the Situational Operator Model, was tested in 2 experiments. It assumes that situation models for descriptions are built incrementally by using basic operations that are triggered by text content. In both experiments, participants read and reread texts that described simple machines. Sentence reading times were predicted by the number of operations along with variables associated with text-level features. The impact of the number of operations predicted reading times more consistently for better readers than for poorer readers and for the second reading as opposed to the first. The presence of a drawing task (Experiment 1) or learning a diagram of the machines (Experiment 2) increased the correlation between the number of operators and reading time for better readers but lowered them for poorer readers (Experiment 1). The results provided initial support for the model, and its relation to other models of comprehension is discussed.

[1]  Joseph P. Magliano,et al.  Verb Aspect and Situation Models , 2000 .

[2]  Keith K. Millis,et al.  Resource allocation during the rereading of scientific texts , 1998, Memory & cognition.

[3]  A. Glenberg,et al.  The representation of space in mental models derived from text , 1998, Memory & cognition.

[4]  W. Kintsch.  Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition , 1998 .

[5]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  The Construction of Situation Models in Narrative Comprehension: An Event-Indexing Model , 1995 .

[6]  Carol Bergfeld Mills,et al.  Reading Procedural Texts: Effects of Purpose for Reading and Predictions of Reading Comprehension Models. , 1995 .

[7]  T. Givon.  8. Coming to terms with cognition: Coherence in text vs. Coherence in mind , 1995 .

[8]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Dimensions of situation model construction in narrative comprehension. , 1995 .

[9]  T. Trabasso,et al.  Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. , 1994, Psychological review.

[10]  Raymond W. Kulhavy,et al.  Comparing Elaboration and Dual Coding Theories: The Case of Maps and Text , 1993 .

[11]  A. Glenberg,et al.  Comprehension of illustrated text: Pictures help to build mental models☆ , 1992 .

[12]  M. Gernsbacher,et al.  Investigating differences in general comprehension skill. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[13]  B. Tversky,et al.  Searching imagined environments. , 1990 .

[14]  Jerrold E. Barnett,et al.  Read Something Once, Why Read it Again?: Repetitive Reading and Recall , 1989 .

[15]  S. Greenspan,et al.  Updating situation models during narrative comprehension , 1989 .

[16]  R. Klatzky.  The role of motor representations in semantic sensibility judgments , 1989 .

[17]  W. Kintsch.  The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model. , 1988, Psychological review.

[18]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Knowledge Organization and Text Organization , 1987 .

[19]  I. Biederman.  Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. , 1987, Psychological review.

[20]  A. Glenberg,et al.  Mental models contribute to foregrounding during text comprehension , 1987 .

[21]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Quantitative and qualitative effects of repetition on learning from technical text. , 1986 .

[22]  F. Schmalhofer,et al.  Three components of understanding a programmer's manual: Verbatim, propositional and situational representations , 1986 .

[23]  Nancy Lockitch Loman,et al.  SIGNALING TECHNIQUES THAT INCREASE THE UNDERSTANDABILITY OF EXPOSITORY PROSE , 1983 .

[24]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Can you repeat that? Qualitative effects of repetition and advance organizers on learning from science prose. , 1983 .

[25]  W. Cromer.  The difference model: a new explanation for some reading difficulties. , 1970, Journal of educational psychology.

[26]  R. Flesch.  A new readability yardstick. , 1948, The Journal of applied psychology.

[27]  M. Just,et al.  From the SelectedWorks of Marcel Adam Just 1992 A capacity theory of comprehension : Individual differences in working memory , 2017 .

[28]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  The role of situational continuity in narrative understanding. , 1999 .

[29]  Morton Ann Gernsbacher,et al.  Two Decades of Structure Building. , 1997, Discourse processes.

[30]  L. Barsalou,et al.  Mundane creativity in perceptual symbol systems , 1997 .

[31]  Jane Oakhill,et al.  Individual differences in children's text comprehension. , 1994 .

[32]  Talmy Givón,et al.  Coherence in text, coherence in mind , 1993 .

[33]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Searching Imagined Environments , 1990 .

[34]  J. L. Myers,et al.  Regression analyses of repeated measures data in cognitive research. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[35]  C. Perfetti.  Verbal efficiency in reading ability. , 1988 .

[36]  Julie Noble,et al.  Predicting Grades in Specific College Freshman Courses from ACT Test Scores and Self-Reported High School Grades. November 1987. , 1988 .

[37]  George Lakoff,et al.  Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things , 1987 .

[38]  Dale M. Willows,et al.  The Psychology of illustration , 1987 .

[39]  J. Noble.  Estimating Reading Skill from ACT Assessment Scores. , 1986 .

[40]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Component processes in text comprehension and some of their interactions , 1985 .

[41]  P. Johnson-Laird.  Mental Models : Towards a Cognitive Science of Language , 1983 .

[42]  S. Kosslyn.  The medium and the message in mental imagery: A theory. , 1981 .

[43]  M. Carney,et al.  Reading Ability, Academic Performance, and College Attrition. , 1981 .

[44]  G. Miller,et al.  Language and Perception , 1976 .