Assessing text representations with recognition: The interaction of domain knowledge and text coherence.

Long, Debra L.; Wilson, Jeannette; Hurley, Ryan; Prat, Chantel S.

doi:10.1037/0278-7393.32.4.816

Cited by 22 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 44 publications

(83 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this regard, the association of recollection with the elaborative and inferential aspects of stimulus encoding (Long, Wilson, Hurley, & Prat, 2006;Mandler, 1980;Yonelinas, 2002) has stemmed from the application of dual-process analyses. However, the phantom recollection process is itself strongly associated with highly inferential representations, such as situation models.…”

Section: Recollectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Veridical and false memory for text: A multiprocess analysis

Singer

Remillard

2008

Journal of Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Recollectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Veridical and false memory for text: A multiprocess analysis

Singer

Remillard

2008

Journal of Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There was a tendency of the high knowledge readers to attain the best results, taking advantage of a minimally cohesive text, but not in the diagram task, where they benefited from the most cohesive text. Long, Wilson, Hurley, and Prat (2006) investigated the influence of knowledge about the topic of a story and cohesion on readers' text representations using recognition memory. They found that high-knowledge readers had a better recall with the low-cohesion texts.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supporting students' learning in the domain of computer science

Gasparinatou¹,

Grigoriadou²

2011

Computer Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have shown that students with low knowledge understand and learn better from more cohesive texts, whereas highknowledge students have been shown to learn better from texts of lower cohesion. This study examines whether high-knowledge readers in computer science benefit from a text of low cohesion. Undergraduate students (n ¼ 65) read one of four versions of a text concerning Local Network Topologies, orthogonally varying local and global cohesion. Participants' comprehension was examined through free-recall measure, text-based, bridging-inference, elaborative-inference, problem-solving questions and a sorting task. The results indicated that high-knowledge readers benefited from the lowcohesion text. The interaction of text cohesion and knowledge was reliable for the sorting activity, for elaborative-inference and for problem-solving questions. Although high-knowledge readers performed better in text-based and in bridging-inference questions with the low-cohesion text, the interaction of text cohesion and knowledge was not reliable. The results suggest a more complex view of when and for whom textual cohesion affects comprehension and consequently learning in computer science.

show abstract

“…Long and her colleagues have argued that the recollection and familiarity estimates can be used to examine the nature of readers’ text representations (Long & Prat, 2002; Long, Prat, Johns, Morris, & Jonathan, 2008; Long, Wilson, Hurley, & Prat, 2006). According to dual-process models, recollection increases when studied items are elaborated, that is, when semantic and conceptual processing yields relations among items.…”

Section: Recollection Familiarity and Readers’ Text Representationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A memory-retrieval view of discourse representation: The recollection and familiarity of text ideas

Long

Johns

Jonathan

2012

Language and Cognitive Processes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to most theories of text comprehension, readers construct and store in memory at least two inter-related representations: a text base containing the explicit ideas in a text and a discourse model that contains the overall meaning or “gist” of a text. The authors propose a refinement of this view in which text representations are distinguished by both encoding and retrieval processes. Some encoding processes “unitize” concepts in a text and some “relate” units to one another. Units are retrieved based on familiarity processes in recognition, whereas related units are retrieved based on recollective processes. This distinction was tested in two experiments. In Experiment 1, readers comprehended sentence pairs in which some could be related by means of a causal inference, whereas others were only temporally related. Overall recognition was high in both conditions, but recollection, much more than familiarity, was sensitive to the causal manipulation. In Experiment 2, sentences began with a definite article as a linguistic cue to connect noun phrases or began with an indefinite article. The discourse manipulation had its primary influence on recollection. The authors suggest that the discourse model may be a collection of text ideas that are available to consciousness at retrieval. The gist-level representation of a text may not be a pre-stored structure; rather, it may be generated, in part, as a summary description of recollected text ideas.

show abstract

Assessing text representations with recognition: The interaction of domain knowledge and text coherence.

Cited by 22 publications

References 44 publications

Veridical and false memory for text: A multiprocess analysis

Veridical and false memory for text: A multiprocess analysis

Supporting students' learning in the domain of computer science

A memory-retrieval view of discourse representation: The recollection and familiarity of text ideas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About