Experiment 1 involved having undergraduates take or not take notes while listening to two passages with or without signals (structural cues). When notetaking on signaled text, recall was maximized; on nonsignaled text, recall was minimized. Because notetakers appeared to rely on signals in processing text, it seemed that notetaking produced a structure-search process. Regression analyses suggested that notetaking in the presence of signals enhanced recall of field-dependent (FDs) but not field-independent learners (FIs). Experiment 2 directly examined this issue in a reading context. Increased high-level recall across passages of the same overall structure (a transfer of structure effect) was found for FIs only in the non-notetaking conditions and for the FDs only in the notetaking conditions. Thus, FIs seemed to spontaneously use a tacit structure strategy when left to their own devices and FDs appeared to immediately display powerful structuring skills when induced to do so via notetaking.The standard view of text (Britton & Glaesser, 1996) is that it is organized in hierarchical fashion with varying degrees of interconnectedness among the basic elements of meaning in the text. At the most general level, expository text poses some form of argument. For example, a problem may be presented with specific issues and some explanation of points, then a solution offered involving, perhaps, a description of the attributes of the proposal, the manner of performing it, and so on. The form of the argument and the key content elements can be explicitly pointed out by means of signaling words, such as the solution is or therefore, contained in the text.Signals, then, serve to cue the learner to the important text content and its organizational structure (

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract