Age differences in tracking characters during narrative comprehension

Noh, Seung Man; Stine‐Morrow, Elizabeth A. L.

doi:10.3758/mc.37.6.769

Cited by 37 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 47 publications

(49 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The many studies that do not support preservation include those by Noh and Stine-Morrow (2009), Light and Capps (1986), Dixon et al, (1982), Stine, Cheung, and Henderson (1995), and Hamm and Hasher (1992). Compared to young adults, older readers have difficulty accessing an earlier character in a text after a new character has been introduced (Noh & Stine-Morrow, 2009), identifying the correct referent of a pronoun when one sentence intervenes between pronoun and referent (Light & Capps, 1986), and matching one concept in a sentence to a related concept in the previous sentence (Zelinski & Miura, 1990).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Compared to young adults, older readers have difficulty accessing an earlier character in a text after a new character has been introduced (Noh & Stine-Morrow, 2009), identifying the correct referent of a pronoun when one sentence intervenes between pronoun and referent (Light & Capps, 1986), and matching one concept in a sentence to a related concept in the previous sentence (Zelinski & Miura, 1990). Other studies suggest difficulties for older adults in organizing the elements of a text with respect to their importance (Dixon et al, 1982), differentially allotting time to comprehension of concepts new to a text (Stine, Cheung, & Henderson; 1995), and appropriately discarding irrelevant information as they read (Hamm & Hasher, 1992).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Predictive inferences have been classified as elaborative inferences because they add information to what is explicitly stated. Some studies suggest that older adults do encode some types of elaborative inference (e.g., Morrow, Stine-Morrow, Leirer, Andrassy, & Kahn, 1997; Radvansky, Copeland, Berish, & Dijkstra, 2003; Radvansky, Copeland, & Zwaan, 2003; Radvansky & Dijkstra, 2007; Radvansky, Zwaan, Curiel, & Copeland, 2001; Stine-Morrow, Gagne, Morrow, & DeWall, 2004; Stine-Morrow, Morrow, & Leno, 2002) but others that they do not (e.g., Cohen, 1979, 1981; Dixon, Simon, Nowak, & Hultsch, 1982; Hamm & Hasher, 1992; Hess, 1995; Light & Capps, 1986; Stine, 1990; Stine & Wingfield, 1988; Noh & Stine-Morrow, 2009; Till 1985; Till & Walsh, 1980; Zacks, Hasher, Doren, Hamm, & Attig, 1987; Zelinski & Miura, 1990). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Aging and predicting inferences: A diffusion model analysis

McKoon

Ratcliff

2013

Journal of Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the domain of discourse processing, it has been claimed that older adults (60-90-year-olds) are less likely to encode and remember some kinds of information from texts than young adults. The experiment described here shows that they do make a particular kind of inference to the same extent that college-age adults do. The inferences examined were “predictive” inferences such as the inference that something bad would happen to the actress for the sentence “The director and cameraman were ready to shoot close-ups when suddenly the actress fell from the 14th story” (McKoon & Ratcliff, 1986). Participants read sentences like the actress one and then later they were asked to decide whether words that expressed an inference (e.g., “dead”) had or had not appeared explicitly in a sentence. To directly compare older adults' performance to college-age adults' performance, we used a sequential sampling diffusion model (Ratcliff, 1978) to map response times and accuracy onto a single dimension of the strength with which an inference was encoded. On this dimension, there were no significant differences between the older and younger adults.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Aging and predicting inferences: A diffusion model analysis

McKoon

Ratcliff

2013

Journal of Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The idea that the fundamental processing of situation models is intact with ageing (Radvansky & Dijkstra, 2007;StineMorrow et al, 2008) would suggest older adults will be sensitive to focus cues. Older adults have been found to be more attentive to character shifts during reading, which again suggests the ability to use information structuring is preserved in healthy ageing (e.g., Noh & Stine-Morrow, 2009;Radvansky et al, 2001). In Experiment 1 (using self-paced reading), we investigated age effects on whether an element of a sentence is made more accessible through being in focus, and we also address the question of whether other elements are made less accessible.…”

Section: The Present Researchmentioning

confidence: 97%

Reading in healthy ageing: The influence of information structuring in sentences.

Price

Sanford

2012

Psychology and Aging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In three experiments, we investigated the cognitive effects of linguistic prominence to establish whether focus plays a similar or different role in modulating language processing in healthy ageing. Information structuring through the use of cleft sentences is known to increase the processing efficiency of anaphoric references to elements contained with a marked focus structure. It also protects these elements from becoming suppressed in the wake of subsequent information, suggesting selective mechanisms of enhancement and suppression. In Experiment 1 (using self-paced reading), we found that focus enhanced (faster) integration for anaphors referring to words contained within the scope of focus; but suppressed (slower) integration for anaphors to words contained outside of the scope of focus; and in some cases, the effects were larger in older adults. In Experiment 2 (using change detection), we showed that older adults relied more on the linguistic structure to enhance change detection when the changed word was in focus. In Experiment 3 (using delayed probe recognition and eye-tracking), we found that older adults recognized probes more accurately when they were made to elements within the scope of focus than when they were outside the scope of focus. These results indicate that older adults' ability to selectively attend or suppress concepts in a marked focus structure is preserved.

show abstract

“…Narrative construction is closely related with the qualities of the narrator regarding cognitive qualities (Ayhan Aksu-Koç 1988;Berman and Slobin 1994;Fang 2001;Noh and Stine-Morrow 2009;Özcan 2005); social qualities (Labov 1972;Nicolopoulou 1996); the quality of whether the narrator is monolingual or bilingual (Akıncı 1999;Aarssen 1996;Uchikoshi 2005) and text organizational (Peterson and Dodsworth 1991;Sah 2013) qualities of the narrators.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The age of the narrator and the qualities of the narrative constructed

Özcan

2017

lsmll

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was designed to investigate the qualitative features of the stories produced by children, adults and older people with a special focus on sentence structures, the emergence of story units, Mean Length of Utterance (henceforward MLU) and evaluative language. Participants are 60 children from 3 to 5-year-olds, 60 adults from 20 to 30-year-olds and 60 older people who are 60 and over. Data were collected by using Mercer Meyer's (1969) textless picture book, Frog, where are you?, which depicts the events that take place while a boy and a dog are in search of a missing frog in countryside.Results showed that there are significant differences in the qualitative features of the sentence structure produced by children and other two groups in the usage of connectives. Although adults and the older participants show similar features in the emergence and quality of story units as they are defined by Labov and Waletzky (1967), the narratives produced by children render significant differences both quantitatively and qualitatively. Regarding MLU, as they are in other narrative components, children are different from the other two groups. The mean length of sentences in adults' stories is longer than those of children and olds and the sentences produced by adults are more complex than those of both olds and children. All of the three groups use evaluative language in their narratives. However, the The Age of the Narrator and the Qualities of the Narrative … 157 amount and quality of the evaluative language differs according to the age of the participants.

show abstract

Age differences in tracking characters during narrative comprehension

Cited by 37 publications

References 47 publications

Aging and predicting inferences: A diffusion model analysis

Aging and predicting inferences: A diffusion model analysis

Reading in healthy ageing: The influence of information structuring in sentences.

The age of the narrator and the qualities of the narrative constructed

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About