How Much Knowledge Is Too Little? When a Lack of Knowledge Becomes a Barrier to Comprehension

Abstract

Have you ever found it difficult to read something because you lack knowledge on the topic? We investigated this phenomenon with a sample of 3,534 high school students who took a background-knowledge test before working on a reading-comprehension test on the topic of ecology. Broken-line regression revealed a knowledge threshold: Below the threshold, the relationship between comprehension and knowledge was weak (β = 0.18), but above the threshold, a strong and positive relation emerged (β = 0.81). Further analyses indicated that certain topically relevant words (e.g., ecosystem, habitat) were more important to know than others when predicting the threshold, and these keywords could be identified using natural-language-processing techniques. Collectively, these results may help identify who is likely to have a problem comprehending information on a specific topic and, to some extent, what knowledge is likely required to comprehend information on that topic.

Reading Wars, Reading Science, and English Learners

“…The evidence documenting the relation between knowledge, whether conceptualized as domain, background, or general, and reading comprehension is voluminous. Researchers have even been able to establish a knowledge threshold, such that knowledge facilitates reading comprehension only when knowledge reaches a certain threshold (O’Reilly, Wang, & Sabatini, 2019). Below it, readers do not have enough knowledge to move the comprehension needle appreciably.…”

“…As students progress through school, knowledge becomes an increasingly important factor in reading comprehension. A little knowledge, and even a bit more than a little, is usually insufficient for comprehending challenging and complex texts (O’Reilly et al, 2019). Some threshold of knowledge must be reached in order for students to begin fully comprehending texts they start encountering in upper elementary school.…”

Profiles of warm engagement and cold evaluation in multiple-document comprehension

“…Given the prominent position of prior knowledge in models of reading and reading research (e.g., McNamara & Magliano, 2009;O'Reilly, Wang, & Sabatini, 2019), we also wanted to explore potential differences in participants' prior topic knowledge across default stances. Considering the theoretical justification for the CAEM, we assumed that the different profiles described by List and Alexander could be identified by performing hierarchical cluster analysis on data collected using measures of interest, attitudes, and source evaluation skills.…”

Ten simple rules for open human health research

“…Evidence indicates benefits to both data creators and the wider research community when research objects beyond books and articles are openly shared [ 70 , 130 ]. Even when submitting a manuscript to a traditional publisher, you can write a summary and/or a glossary of key terms [ 131 ], using language devoid of scientific jargon [ 132 ], add it as supplementary information to your manuscript, post it on your lab website, and share a link through social media to relevant groups. Consider using annotation tools [ 133 – 135 ] to make papers you are interested in accessible to a wider community.…”