2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.03.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Enhancing comprehension in small reading groups using a manipulation strategy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
60
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 94 publications
(67 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
6
60
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…When compared to children in a control condition who read and reread the signaled sentences, children using PM remember much more (Cohen's d > 1) from the text. This effect is found working with children one-on-one (Glenberg, Gutierrez, Levin, Japuntich, & Kaschak, 2004) and when the children work in three-person reading groups (Glenberg, Brown, & Levin, 2007). Similar effects are seen in a listening comprehension environment with children with learning disabilities (Marley, Levin, & Glenberg, 2007).…”
supporting
confidence: 63%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…When compared to children in a control condition who read and reread the signaled sentences, children using PM remember much more (Cohen's d > 1) from the text. This effect is found working with children one-on-one (Glenberg, Gutierrez, Levin, Japuntich, & Kaschak, 2004) and when the children work in three-person reading groups (Glenberg, Brown, & Levin, 2007). Similar effects are seen in a listening comprehension environment with children with learning disabilities (Marley, Levin, & Glenberg, 2007).…”
supporting
confidence: 63%
“…We think this alternative is unlikely for two reasons. First, in some of previous work (e.g., Glenberg, Brown, et al, 2007;Glenberg et al, 2004), there was explicit control of time on task by having children in the control condition reread those sentences that were manipulated by children in the Moved by Reading condition. Nonetheless, children in the Moved by Reading condition greatly outperformed children in the control condition on assessments of comprehension and memory.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Semantic language processing that is concordant with a motor action stimulates motor action (Zwaan & Taylor, 2006). Evidence also indicates that movement and verbal processing are facilitated in children, in that manipulating objects during reading facilitates reading comprehension (Glenberg, Brown, & Levin, 2007;Glenberg, Gutierrez, Levin, Japuntich, & Kaschak, 2004). Two further lines of evidence are considered next, that link body parts to verb processing (Maouene et al, 2008) and show that embodied lexical items enjoy processing advantages (Siakaluk et al, 2006;Siakaluk et al, 2008).…”
Section: Embodied Cognition and Links Between Vocabulary And Fine Motmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The physical external support intervention seems to be a particularly effective method to improve young students' ability to generate mental models while performing text processing tasks. Even when the physical manipulation was executed by other people, young students who simply watched the manipulation had improved reading comprehension (Glenberg, Brown, & Levin, 2007;Marley et al, 2010). Moreover, in the circumstances when real objects are absent, mapping words to the representations of real 21 objects are also sufficient for improving comprehension.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%