Developmental Progression of Referential Resolution in Comprehending Online Texts

The purpose of this study is to examine readers’ comprehension as they develop their mental representation of reference in four sequential online texts. A total of 92 college students from three reading classes were recruited to complete the following steps in each text: (1) identify references, (2) draw the relationships between references, and (3) answer reading comprehension test items. Results of this study showed that the correlation between referential resolution and reading comprehension tests ranged from .68 to .90 in four online texts. This indicated that when readers’ scores in referential resolution increased, their scores in reading comprehension tests were also raised. Among three groups of readers, the more-proficient readers were able to integrate the references in different parts of the text as a coherent network from text 1 to 4. In contrast, average and lessproficient readers initially did not integrate any reference when reading the first text. They eventually clustered different references and referred them to a correct subject in the final text. The keys to the development of college readers’ mental representation of reference lay in whether they were actively engaged in comprehension monitoring and frequently asked for feedback tool as a scaffold.

[1]  Jane Oakhill,et al.  Understanding of anaphoric relations in skilled and less skilled comprehenders , 1988 .

[2]  Hilary Horn Ratner,et al.  Effects of Passage Type on Comprehension Monitoring and Recall in Good and Poor Readers , 1992 .

[3]  B. Laufer,et al.  Lexical Guessing in Context in EFL Reading Comprehension. , 1984 .

[4]  Inmaculada Fortanet,et al.  The use of 'we' in university lectures: reference and function , 2004 .

[5]  Davida Charney,et al.  Cultural Representations of Rhetorical Conventions: The Effects on Reading Recall. , 2002 .

[6]  Stephen J. Payne,et al.  Constructing structure maps of multiple on-line texts , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[7]  Anthony J. Sanford,et al.  Quantifier Polarity and Referential Focus during Reading , 1998 .

[8]  A. Brown.  Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms , 1987 .

[9]  Kendall Hartley,et al.  Learning strategies and hypermedia instruction , 2001 .

[10]  Yu-Fen Yang,et al.  Reassessing Readers' Comprehension Monitoring. , 2002 .

[11]  S. Paris,et al.  How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction. , 1990 .

[12]  Jean-François Rouet,et al.  Effects of content representation and readers' prior knowledge on the comprehension of hypertext , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[13]  Paul van den Broek,et al.  Reading for Meaning: Fostering Comprehension in the Middle Grades. Language and Literacy Series. , 1999 .

[14]  P. Johnson-Laird,et al.  Co-reference and reasoning , 2004, Memory & cognition.

[15]  Hope J. Hartman.  Developing Students’ Metacognitive Knowledge and Skills , 2001 .

[16]  Sunil Mithas,et al.  Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder: Toward a Contextual Understanding of Compensation of IT Professionals within and Across Geographies , 2018 .

[17]  B. Lee,et al.  Reference and blending in a computer role-playing game , 2004 .

[18]  Beau Jones,et al.  Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction , 1990 .

[19]  Sonia Rachele Piotti,et al.  The use of 'we' in university lectures: reference and function , 2005 .