Individual differences in reprocessing of text.

This study examined the roles of basic reading processes and prior knowledge in reprocessing of expository text. According to their performance in a decoding and a working memory task, 48 college students were divided into groups of above-average and average readers and either rewrote notes, reread notes, or reread a text. The 3 strategies were equally effective in improving comprehension for text-explicit and text-implicit information, and reading ability and prior knowledge were more predictive for comprehension than was the type of reprocessing activity. Text reprocessing might help average readers to compensate for their lower performance in answering text-implicit questions, whereas above-average readers seem to combine more text information with their knowledge base

[1]  Gilles O. Einstein,et al.  Note-taking, individual differences, and memory for lecture information. , 1985 .

[2]  M. Just,et al.  The psychology of reading and language comprehension , 1986 .

[3]  H. Ladas,et al.  Summarizing Research: A Case Study , 1980 .

[4]  John P. Rickards,et al.  The encoding versus the external storage hypothesis in note taking , 1978 .

[5]  Kenneth A. Kiewra The process of review: A levels of processing approach , 1983 .

[6]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Strategies of discourse comprehension , 1983 .

[7]  Lauren Leslie,et al.  Effect of Prior Knowledge on Good and Poor Readers' Memory of Text. , 1988 .

[8]  Suzanne Hidi,et al.  Notetaking by Experts and Novices: An Attempt to Identify Teachable Strategies , 1983 .

[9]  Susan M. Shimmerlik,et al.  Reorganization and the Recall of Prose. , 1976 .

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

[11]  R. Sternberg Advances in the psychology of human intelligence , 1982 .

[12]  P. Johnson-Laird Mental models , 1989 .

[13]  R. W. Kulhavy,et al.  Note-Taking and Passage Style. , 1981 .

[14]  David Berliner The effects of test-like events and note-taking on learning from lecture instruction , 1968 .

[15]  Alan M. Lesgold,et al.  Foregrounding effects in discourse comprehension , 1979 .

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

[17]  John B. Black,et al.  Understanding expository text : a theoretical and practical handbook for analyzing explanatory text , 1986 .

[18]  The relationship between levels of note-taking and achievement. , 1984 .

[19]  C. Kardash,et al.  Effects of Time of Review and Test Expectancy on Learning from Text. , 1989 .

[20]  Francis J. Di Vesta,et al.  Listening and Note Taking: II. Immediate and Delayed Recall as Functions of Variations in Thematic Continuity, Note Taking, and Length of Listening-Review Intervals. , 1973 .

[21]  Rothkope Ez,et al.  Textual constraint as function of repeated inspection. , 1968 .

[22]  M. Howe,et al.  PRESENTATION VARIABLES AND STUDENTS' ACTIVITIES IN MEANINGFUL LEARNING , 1975 .

[23]  J. Frederiksen,et al.  Spelling and sound: Approaches to the internal lexicon. , 1976 .

[24]  F. J. Vesta,et al.  What Is Learned in Note Taking , 1981 .

[25]  Edward B. Fry,et al.  Fry's Readability Graph: Clarifications, Validity, and Extension to Level 17. , 1977 .

[26]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Processing determinants of reading speed. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[27]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  Schemata as Scaffolding for the Representation of Information in Connected Discourse , 1977 .

[28]  Gail E. Tompkins,et al.  Structured Notetaking: A New Strategy for Content Area Readers. , 1988 .

[29]  Ora Sterling Anderson,et al.  An investigation of the effects of prior knowledge on comprehension of discourse by good and poor comprehenders , 1984 .

[30]  S. Brady,et al.  Reading ability and short-term memory: The role of phonological processing , 1990 .

[31]  Kenneth A. Kiewra Investigating Notetaking and Review: A Depth of Processing Alternative , 1985 .

[32]  Robert H. Logie,et al.  Components of fluent reading , 1985 .

[33]  Peter Afflerbach,et al.  The influence of prior knowledge on expert readers' main idea construction strategies. , 1990 .

[34]  Keith E. Stanovich,et al.  Cognitive variation in adult college students differing in reading ability. , 1990 .

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

[36]  L. Siegel Davis Reading Test. , 1959 .

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

[38]  Raymond W. Kulhavy,et al.  Notetaking and depth of processing , 1979 .

[39]  Jeanne T. Amlund Repetitive Reading and Recall of Expository Text. , 1986 .

[40]  P. Carpenter,et al.  Individual differences in working memory and reading , 1980 .

[41]  Joel R. Levin,et al.  Cognitive strategy research : educational applications , 1983 .

[42]  J. Hartley Notetaking Research: Resetting the Scoreboard , 1983 .

[43]  Stephen L. Benton,et al.  The relationship between information-processing ability and notetaking , 1988 .

[44]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Inferences and text comprehension , 1990 .

[45]  Judith Orasanu,et al.  Reading Comprehension: From Research to Practice. , 1986 .

[46]  Sarah L. Dowhower Repeated Reading: Research into Practice. , 1989 .

[47]  Frank R. Yekovich,et al.  The Influence of Domain Knowledge on Inferencing In Low-Aptitude Individuals , 1990 .

[48]  Kenneth A. Kiewra A review of note-taking: The encoding-storage paradigm and beyond , 1989 .

[49]  Janet S. Twyman,et al.  Teaching Reading Comprehension , 1978 .

[50]  James F. Voss,et al.  Text Processing of Domain-Related Information for Individuals with High and Low Domain Knowledge: Methodological Considerations. , 1979 .

[51]  Charles A. Perfetti,et al.  There are Generalized Abilities and One of Them is Reading , 2018, Knowing, Learning, and Instruction.

[52]  Susan R. Goldman,et al.  Short-Term Retention of Discourse during Reading. , 1980 .

[53]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Micro Experimental Laboratory: An integrated system for IBM PC compatibles , 1988 .

[54]  S. McKelvie,et al.  Effects of attendance, note-taking, and review on memory for a lecture: Encoding vs. external storage functions of notes. , 1986 .

[55]  John F. Carter,et al.  Note Taking Versus Note Having. , 1975 .

[56]  R. Mayer,et al.  Generative Effects of Note-Taking during Science Lectures. , 1986 .

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

[58]  Henry F. Arnold The comparative effectiveness of certain study techniques in the field of history. , 1942 .

[59]  G. E. MacKinnon,et al.  Reading Research Advances in Theory and Practice , 1985 .

[60]  M. Harris,et al.  Effect of Note Taking and Review on Recall. , 1973 .

[61]  Hiller A. Spires,et al.  The Directed Notetaking Activity: A Self-Questioning Approach. , 1989 .

[62]  Kenneth A. Kiewra,et al.  Providing study notes: Comparison of three types of notes for review. , 1988 .

[63]  James Crewe The Effect of Study Strategies on the Retention of College Text Materiala , 1969 .

[64]  Janet E. Davidson,et al.  Information processing correlates of reading , 1985, Journal of Memory and Language.

[65]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Toward a model of text comprehension and production. , 1978 .

[66]  D. Reutzel,et al.  EFFECTS OF PRIOR KNOWLEDGE, EXPLICITNESS, AND CLAUSE ORDER ON CHILDREN'S COMPREHENSION OF CAUSAL RELATIONSHIPS , 1990 .

[67]  R. Mayer,et al.  Note taking as a generative activity. , 1978 .

[68]  Jane Oakhill,et al.  Becoming a skilled reader , 1988 .