Examining Constructs in Reading Comprehension Using Two Presentation Modes: Paper vs. Computer

This study examined the processes of reading comprehension using paper presentation compared to computer presentation. Computers are increasingly being used more as a mode for instruction in schools, however, no study was identified that provides explanations regarding underlying reading comprehension processes or constructs. To examine constructs of reading comprehension, a text recall measure was employed. Additionally, to examine reading comprehension in an interactive mode a highlighting task was used. In the memory recall measure, a significant main effect was found for rhetorical type (collection over causal) but not for mode of presentation or for idea units. Findings were consistent with Meyer's results [1–3]. In using an on-line measure of highlighting, a significant main effect was found for mode of presentation (paper over computer). It would be expected under Meyer's constructs that there would be a difference by rhetorical type; however, no differences were found. The conclusion of this study is that reading comprehension constructs appear to be the same between computer presentation and paper presentation of text. However, when readers interact with text via computer (highlighting task) there appear to be different comprehension constructs evoked.

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

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

[3]  Diane McGrath,et al.  Hypertext, CAI, Paper, or Program Control: Do Learners Benefit From Choices? , 1992 .

[4]  Jerome A. Niles,et al.  New Inquiries in Reading Research and Instruction. Thirty-First Yearbook of the National Reading Conference. , 1982 .

[5]  Gerald J. August,et al.  Generative underlining strategies in prose recall. , 1975 .

[6]  Joseph E. Grimes,et al.  The Thread of Discourse , 1984 .

[7]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  An experimental evaluation of a computer based study management system 1 , 1975 .

[8]  David Reinking,et al.  Computer-Mediated Text and Comprehension Differences: The Role of Reading Time, Reader Preference, and Estimation of Learning. , 1988 .

[9]  Ann Lathrop,et al.  Courseware in the Classroom: Selecting, Organizing, and Using Educational Software , 1983 .

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

[11]  Marilyn J. Haring,et al.  Comprehension of stories and expository text , 1980 .

[12]  G W McConkie,et al.  What is recalled after hearing a passage? , 1973, Journal of educational psychology.

[13]  Bonnie J. F. Meyer,et al.  Memory Improved: Reading and Memory Enhancement Across the Life Span Through Strategic Text Structures , 1988 .

[14]  David Reinking,et al.  The Effects of Computer-Mediated Text on Measures of Reading Comprehension and Reading Behavior , 1985 .

[15]  Howard Wainer,et al.  Item Clusters and Computerized Adaptive Testing: A Case for Testlets , 1987 .

[16]  Dennis Shasha,et al.  Information Search with Dynamic Text vs Paper Text: An Empirical Comparison , 1991, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[17]  Jay Blanchard,et al.  Underlining Performance Outcomes in Expository Text. , 1987 .

[18]  Andrew Dillon,et al.  Human Factors of Journal Usage and Design of Electronic Texts , 1989, Interact. Comput..

[19]  Shirley C. Feldmann,et al.  Use of Computer-Mediated Reading Supports to Enhance Reading Comprehension of High School Students , 1991 .

[20]  David J. Oborne,et al.  Reading from Screen versus Paper: There is No Difference , 1988, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[21]  Shawn M. Glynn,et al.  Capturing Readers' Attention by Means of Typographical Cuing Strategies. , 1978 .

[22]  Bonnie J. F. Meyer,et al.  Effects of Discourse Type on Recall , 1984 .

[23]  Samuel Messick,et al.  THE STANDARD PROBLEM: MEANING AND VALUES IN MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION , 1974 .

[24]  Susanne Askwall,et al.  Computer Supported Reading vs Reading Text on Paper: A Comparison of Two Reading Situations , 1985, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[25]  John P. Rickards,et al.  Interaction of Dogmatism and Rhetorical Structure in Text Recall , 1987 .

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

[27]  Restructuring Text Facilitates Written Recall of Main Ideas. , 1982 .

[28]  J. B. Olsen,et al.  THE FOUR GENERATIONS OF COMPUTERIZED EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT , 1988 .

[29]  Allan Collins,et al.  A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing , 1975 .

[30]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  The art of navigating through hypertext , 1990, CACM.

[31]  Bonnie J. F. Meyer,et al.  Reading Research and the Composition Teacher: The Importance of Plans. , 1982 .

[32]  Bruce K. Britton,et al.  Effects of the Organization of Text on Memory: Tests of Retrieval and Response Criterion Hypotheses. , 1980 .