Material-appropriate processing: A contextualist approach to reading and studying strategies

Processing strategies or text adjuncts that are mnemonically effective with some types of text produce no benefits with other text types. A framework for understanding these seemingly inconsistent mnemonic effects across different types of text is presented. The framework suggests that two types of conceptual elaboration are important for free recall: individual-item processing and relational processing. The mnemonic effectiveness of text adjuncts or other manipulations to increase elaboration of a text will depend on: (1) the type of conceptual elaboration induced by the particular text adjunct or study strategy; (2) the type of elaboration invited by the text itself; and (3) the overlap between the processing induced by the text adjunct or study strategy and the processing invited by the text itself. Significant enhancement in recall is anticipated only to the extent that the text adjunct or study strategy encourages processing that is complementary to the processing invited by the material itself. The viability of this framework is demonstrated in a review of the pertinent literature on the mnemonic effects of encoding difficulty. Then, research stimulated by the framework that uses educationally relevant study and text adjuncts (embedded questions, outlining, adjunct pictures) is reviewed. Predictions generated by the framework are consistently upheld.

[1]  Processing in a letter-deletion condition , 1985 .

[2]  L M Reder,et al.  The role of elaborations in learning a skill from an instructional text , 1985, Memory & cognition.

[3]  C. Fletcher,et al.  Causal reasoning in the comprehension of simple narrative texts , 1988 .

[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 P. Rickards.  Adjunct Postquestions in Text: A Critical Review of Methods and Processes , 1979 .

[6]  Encoding effort and recall: A cautionary note. , 1983 .

[7]  H. Roediger,et al.  Explaining dissociations between implicit and explicit measures of retention: A processing account , 1989 .

[8]  Elizabeth M. Zelinski,et al.  Memory for Prose and Aging: A Meta-Analysis , 1988 .

[9]  W Kintsch,et al.  Selective recall of decision-relevant information from texts , 1984, Memory & cognition.

[10]  B. Plake,et al.  Distinctiveness of encoding and recall of text materials. , 1982 .

[11]  T. Trabasso,et al.  Causal relatedness and importance of story events , 1985 .

[12]  Mark A. McDaniel,et al.  Long‐term prose retention: Is an organizational schema sufficient? , 1987 .

[13]  Gilles O. Einstein,et al.  Levels of processing and organization: Additive effects of individual-item and relational processing. , 1980 .

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

[15]  G. Einstein,et al.  Relational and item-specific information in memory , 1981 .

[16]  W. Kintsch.  The representation of meaning in memory , 1974 .

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

[18]  R. R. Hunt,et al.  Yet Another Picture of Imagery: The Roles of Shared and Distinctive Information in Memory , 1987 .

[19]  Peter Winograd,et al.  DIRECT INSTRUCTION OF READING COMPREHENSION STRATEGIES: THE NATURE OF TEACHER EXPLANATION , 1988 .

[20]  Paul van den Broek,et al.  The Effects of Causal Structure on the Comprehension of Narratives: Implications for Education. , 1989 .

[21]  E. Rothkopf.  Learning from Written Instructive Materials: An Exploration of the Control of Inspection Behavior by Test-Like Events , 1966 .

[22]  M. McDaniel,et al.  Illustrations as adjuncts to prose: a text-appropriate processing approach , 1988 .

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

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

[25]  S. Tyler,et al.  Cognitive Effort and Memory , 1979 .

[26]  T. Scruggs,et al.  Reconstructive Elaborations: A Model for Content Area Learning , 1989 .

[27]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Use of Cognitive Capacity in Reading: Effects of Some Content Features of Text. , 1983 .

[28]  M. McDaniel,et al.  The role of elaborative and schema processes in story memory , 1984, Memory & cognition.

[29]  Mark A. McDaniel,et al.  The role of organizational processes in long-term retention. , 1981 .

[30]  John D. Bransford,et al.  Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing , 1977 .

[31]  M. McDaniel,et al.  Encoding difficulty and memory enhancement for young and older readers. , 1989, Psychology and aging.

[32]  T. Trabasso,et al.  Causal thinking and the representation of narrative events , 1985 .

[33]  Richard J. Hamilton.  A Framework for the Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Adjunct Questions and Objectives , 1985 .

[34]  J. J. Franks,et al.  Learning From Explicit Versus Implicit Texts , 1982 .

[35]  L. Jacoby.  On interpreting the effects of repetition: Solving a problem versus remembering a solution , 1978 .

[36]  David K. Dickinson,et al.  Scratching Below the Surface Structure: Exploring the Usefulness of Story Grammars. , 1982 .

[37]  Peter Graf,et al.  Reading and remembering: Conceptual and perceptual processing involved in reading rotated passages , 1984 .

[38]  Patricia A. Alexander,et al.  Learning and study strategies : issues in assessment, instruction, and evaluation , 1988 .

[39]  M. McDaniel,et al.  Memory for prose: The influence of relational and proposition-specific processing. , 1984 .

[40]  J. Glover.  Distinctiveness of Encoding: The Effects of Paraphrasing and Drawing Inferences on Memory from Prose. , 1981 .

[41]  M. McDaniel,et al.  Long-term retention: When incidental semantic processing fails. , 1977 .

[42]  Jill K Berry,et al.  Children’s learning of all the news that’s fit to picture , 1980 .

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

[44]  Ralph E. Reynolds,et al.  THE ROLE OF ATTENTION IN STUDYING AND LEARNING , 1988 .

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

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

[47]  Ernest T. Goetz,et al.  SELECTION AND USE OF STUDY STRATEGIES: THE ROLE OF THE STUDIER'S BELIEFS ABOUT SELF AND STRATEGIES , 1988 .

[48]  Lynn Hasher,et al.  The role of context in the encoding of information. , 1981 .

[49]  Increasing Content Area Learning of Learning Disabled Students: Research Implementation. , 1988 .

[50]  L. E. Bourne,et al.  Remembering the levels of information in words , 1978 .

[51]  Donald A. Norman.  Notes Toward a Theory of Complex Learning , 1978 .

[52]  Gilles O. Einstein,et al.  Qualitative and quantitative considerations in encoding difficulty effects , 1988, Memory & cognition.