Individual differences in working memory strategies for reading expository text

This study investigated whether individual differences in working memory (WM) span are associated with different WM management strategies during the reading of expository text. In Experiment 1, probe questions were presented on line during reading to determine whether thematic information was maintained in WM throughout comprehension. The data indicated that readers across the range of WM span maintained thematic information in WM throughout the reading of a given passage. In Experiment 2, sentence reading times and accuracy for both topic and detail questions were measured in two conditions: when topic sentences were present and when topic sentences were absent. Subjects performed similarly across the range of WM span in the topic-present condition, but lower span subjects performed more poorly on detail questions in the topic-absent condition. In Experiment 3, the topic-present condition of the second experiment was replicated, except that subjects expected to receive questions about details only. Thematic processing and retention of topic and detail information all increased with span. Taken together, these results suggest that, for more difficult text processing tasks, high- and low-span subjects adopt different WM management strategies and these strategies influence what is learned from reading the text.

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

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

[3]  John R. Anderson,et al.  A Comparison of Texts and their Summaries: Memorial Consequences. , 1980 .

[4]  M Glanzer,et al.  Short-Term Storage and the Processing of Cohesion during Reading , 1986, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

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

[6]  J. Elashoff,et al.  Multiple Regression in Behavioral Research. , 1975 .

[7]  Sharon J. Derry,et al.  Effects of an Organizer on Memory for Prose , 1984 .

[8]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Elaboration techniques that increase the meaningfulness of technical text: An experimental test of the learning strategy hypothesis. , 1980 .

[9]  M. Bradley,et al.  Coactivation and comprehension: Contribution of text variables to the illusion of knowing , 1984, Memory & cognition.

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

[11]  L. Cronbach,et al.  Aptitudes and instructional methods: A handbook for research on interactions , 1977 .

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

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

[14]  Robert F. Lorch,et al.  Task effects and individual differences in on‐line processing of the topic structure of a text , 1987 .

[15]  Paul Whitney,et al.  Working‐memory capacity and the use of elaborative inferences in text comprehension , 1991 .

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

[17]  Victoria Chou Hare.  Text Effects on Main Idea Comprehension. , 1989 .

[18]  T. Trabasso,et al.  Understanding text: Achieving explanatory coherence through on‐line inferences and mental operations in working memory , 1993 .

[19]  Edward E. Smith,et al.  The Role of Schemas in Reading Text: A Real-Time Examination. , 1992 .

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

[21]  Mitchell J. Nathan,et al.  A Comprehension-Based Approach to Learning and Understanding , 1993 .

[22]  Paul Whitney,et al.  Reading perspectives and memory for text : an individual differences analysis , 1991 .

[23]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Can Advance Organizers Influence Meaningful Learning? , 1979 .

[24]  D E Kieras,et al.  Topicalization effects in cued recall of technical prose , 1981, Memory & cognition.

[25]  M. Just,et al.  Working memory constraints on the processing of syntactic ambiguity , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[26]  Nancy Marshall,et al.  Comprehension of connected discourse: a study into the relationships between the structure of text and information recalled* , 1978 .

[27]  J. Fodor.  The Modularity of mind. An essay on faculty psychology , 1986 .

[28]  Murray Glanzer,et al.  Memory mechanisms in text comprehension , 1986 .

[29]  D. Kieras.  Component processes in the comprehension of simple prose , 1981 .

[30]  Philip H. Winne,et al.  The Effects of Different Types of Organizers on Students' Learning from Text. , 1989 .

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

[32]  David E. Kieras,et al.  Thematic Processes in the Comprehension of Technical Prose. , 1982 .

[33]  R. Engle,et al.  Individual differences in working memory and comprehension: a test of four hypotheses. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[34]  David E. Kieras,et al.  A model of reader strategy for abstracting main ideas from simple technical prose , 1982 .

[35]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Information accretion and reduction in text processing: Inferences , 1993 .

[36]  G E Raney,et al.  Monitoring changes in cognitive load during reading: an event-related brain potential and reaction time analysis. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

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

[38]  B. Meyer.  The organization of prose and its effects on memory , 1975 .

[39]  B. Meyer.  Use of Top-Level Structure in Text: Key for Reading Comprehension of Ninth-Grade Students. , 1980 .

[40]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  Inference during reading. , 1992 .

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

[42]  Robert F. Lorch,et al.  On-line processing of the topic structure of a text ☆ , 1985 .

[43]  Mark A. McDaniel,et al.  Encoding and recall of texts: The importance of material appropriate processing , 1990 .

[44]  Gary M. Olson,et al.  Cognitive aspects of genre , 1981 .

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

[46]  Charles R. Fletcher,et al.  Strategies for the allocation of short-term memory during comprehension , 1986 .

[47]  P. Johnson-Laird,et al.  Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness , 1985 .

[48]  Marino C. Alvarez,et al.  An investigation of poor readers' use of a thematic strategy to comprehend text. , 1986 .

[49]  B. Meyer,et al.  The interaction of reader strategies and the organization of text , 1982 .

[50]  Mark A. McDaniel,et al.  Encoding difficulty and memory: toward a unifying theory , 1986 .

[51]  R. Engle,et al.  Is working memory capacity task dependent , 1989 .