Measuring Cohesion: An Approach That Accounts for Differences in the Degree of Integration Challenge Presented by Different Types of Sentences

Many proposed cohesion metrics focus on the number and types of explicit cohesive ties detected within a text without also considering differences in the ease or difficulty of required referential and connective inferences. A new cohesion measure structured to address this limitation is proposed. Empirical analyses confirm that this new measure performs similarly to existing measures when applied to the simpler problem of detecting lower and higher cohesion versions of the same text, yet is significantly more effective than existing measures when applied to the more complex problem of distinguishing different texts rated by human experts as requiring lower or higher levels of reading comprehension skill. Implications of these findings relative to the goal of helping teachers and other educators select texts for use in instruction and assessment are discussed.

[1]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Introduction to the Handbook of Discourse Processes , 2003 .

[2]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Variation in Language and Cohesion across Written and Spoken Registers , 2004 .

[3]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[4]  H. S. Heaps,et al.  Information retrieval, computational and theoretical aspects , 1978 .

[5]  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 .

[6]  Morton Ann Gernsbacher,et al.  Language Comprehension As Structure Building , 1990 .

[7]  P. Carrell Cohesion Is Not Coherence , 1982 .

[8]  Michael Halliday,et al.  Cohesion in English , 1976 .

[9]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  Effects of Vocabulary Difficulty, Text Cohesion, and Schema Availability on Reading Comprehension. Technical Report No. 225. , 1981 .

[10]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition , 1998 .

[11]  Peter W. Foltz,et al.  The Measurement of Textual Coherence with Latent Semantic Analysis. , 1998 .

[12]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Coh-Metrix , 2011 .

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

[14]  Georg Rasch,et al.  Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests , 1981, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[15]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Discourse cohesion in text and tutorial dialogue , 2007 .

[16]  T. Landauer,et al.  A Solution to Plato's Problem: The Latent Semantic Analysis Theory of Acquisition, Induction, and Representation of Knowledge. , 1997 .

[17]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Automatic analyses of language, discourse, and situation models , 2008 .

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

[19]  Robert J. Tierney,et al.  Cohesion and Textual Coherence. , 1983 .

[20]  Danielle S. McNamara,et al.  Text simplification and comprehensible input: A case for an intuitive approach , 2012 .

[21]  C. Weir,et al.  Empiricism versus connoisseurship: Establishing the appropriacy of texts in tests of academic reading , 2010 .

[22]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Coh-Metrix: Capturing Linguistic Features of Cohesion , 2010 .