Reading both high-coherence and low-coherence texts: effects of text sequence and prior knowledge.

Previous research (e.g., McNamara, Kintsch, Songer, & Kintsch, 1996) has demonstrated that high-knowledge readers learn more from low-coherence than high-coherence texts. This study further examined the assumption that this advantage is due to the use of knowledge to fill in the gaps in the text, resulting in an integration of the text with prior knowledge. Participants read either a high- or low-coherence text twice, or they read both the high- and low-coherence texts in one order or the other. Reading the low-coherence text first should force the reader to use prior knowledge to fill in the conceptual gaps. However, reading the high-coherence text first was predicted to negate the necessity of using prior knowledge to understand the low-coherence text when the latter was presented second. As predicted, high-knowledge readers benefited from the low-coherence only text when it was read first. Low-knowledge readers benefited from the high-coherence text, regardless of whether it was read first, second, or twice.

[1]  F. Craik,et al.  Levels of Pro-cessing: A Framework for Memory Research , 1975 .

[2]  Marcia K. Johnson,et al.  Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of comprehension and recall , 1972 .

[3]  N. J. Slamecka,et al.  The Generation Effect: Delineation of a Phenomenon , 1978 .

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

[5]  John B. Black,et al.  Scripts in memory for text , 1979, Cognitive Psychology.

[6]  Gregg T. Vesonder,et al.  Text generation and recall by high-knowledge and low-knowledge individuals , 1980 .

[7]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory , 1980 .

[8]  S. Duffy,et al.  Degree of causal relatedness and memory , 1987 .

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

[10]  B. K. Britton,et al.  Using Kintsch's computational model to improve instructional text: Effects of repairing inference calls on recall and cognitive structures. , 1991 .

[11]  Margaret G. McKeown,et al.  Revising Social Studies Text from a Text-Processing Perspective: Evidence of Improved Comprehensibility. , 1991 .

[12]  Charles A. Perfetti,et al.  Individual differences in reprocessing of text. , 1992 .

[13]  Leo G. M. Noordman,et al.  Causal inferences during the reading of expository texts , 1992 .

[14]  R. Schmidt,et al.  New Conceptualizations of Practice: Common Principles in Three Paradigms Suggest New Concepts for Training , 1992 .

[15]  William R. Marmie,et al.  The Long-Term Retention of Knowledge and Skills. , 1993 .

[16]  M. Chi,et al.  Eliciting Self‐Explanations Improves Understanding , 1994 .

[17]  Danielle S. McNamara,et al.  A Procedural Explanation of the Generation Effect: The Use of an Operand Retrieval Strategy for Multiplication and Addition Problems , 1995 .

[18]  Danielle S. McNamara,et al.  Effects of prior knowledge on the generation advantage: Calculators versus calculation to learn simple multiplication. , 1995 .

[19]  Robert A. Bjork,et al.  Memory: Handbook of Perception and Cognition , 1996 .

[20]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Are Good Texts Always Better? Interactions of Text Coherence, Background Knowledge, and Levels of Understanding in Learning From Text , 1996 .

[21]  Alice F. Healy,et al.  The Long-Term Retention of Training and Instruction , 1996 .

[22]  Danielle S. McNamara,et al.  Learning from texts: Effects of prior knowledge and text coherence , 1996 .

[23]  Danielle S. McNamara,et al.  A Generation Advantage for Multiplication Skill and Nonword Vocabulary Acquisition. , 1998 .

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

[25]  Susan R. Goldman,et al.  Students making sense of informational text: Relations between processing and representation , 1998 .

[26]  Danielle S. McNamara,et al.  A Procedural Explanation of the Generation Effect for Simple and Difficult Multiplication Problems and Answers , 2000 .