1983
DOI: 10.1080/01638538309544553
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Use of cognitive capacity in reading: Effects of some content features of text∗

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
26
0
1

Year Published

1989
1989
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
26
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In the text domain, we have specifically suggested that fairy tales afford the extraction of the relationships within (or organizational structure of) the text, whereas expository texts do not readily afford the extraction of such information (McDaniel et al, 1986). The basis for this difference is presumably that the schemata available for processing fairy tales are better developed, better organized, more familiar, and more regular than those used to process expository texts (Britton et aL, 1983;Kintsch and Young, 1984). More recent work raises the possibility that the basis for the difference could also be in the degree to which overall causal structure is readily obtained from local causal relations in the text (Fletcher and Bloom, 1988), with causal chains more clearly defined in narratives than in expository texts (Zelinski and Gilewski, 1988).…”
Section: Differential Affordances Across Materialsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…In the text domain, we have specifically suggested that fairy tales afford the extraction of the relationships within (or organizational structure of) the text, whereas expository texts do not readily afford the extraction of such information (McDaniel et al, 1986). The basis for this difference is presumably that the schemata available for processing fairy tales are better developed, better organized, more familiar, and more regular than those used to process expository texts (Britton et aL, 1983;Kintsch and Young, 1984). More recent work raises the possibility that the basis for the difference could also be in the degree to which overall causal structure is readily obtained from local causal relations in the text (Fletcher and Bloom, 1988), with causal chains more clearly defined in narratives than in expository texts (Zelinski and Gilewski, 1988).…”
Section: Differential Affordances Across Materialsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…It was observed that people reacted more slowly when reading narratives. The researchers, and Willingham with them, concluded that this was because people were more absorbed in reading narratives (Britton et al 1983). Willingham (2004) proposes that the reason stories are interesting is because 'Story structure naturally leads the listener (or reader) to make inferences that are neither terribly easy, nor impossibly difficult'.…”
Section: Willingham's Review Of Narrative In Psycholinguisticsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The references Willingham gives of research showing that stories are more interesting than expositions are by Bruce Britton et al (1983) and Kim (1999). Willingham explains that Britton et al (1983) conducted experiments to see how fast people would react to an external stimulus, such as a sound, when reading narratives as opposed to reading expositions.…”
Section: Willingham's Review Of Narrative In Psycholinguisticsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…11 In mobile advertising, a caller usually decides to use mobile advertisements to convey text messages containing specific or detailed information. 12 Studies have suggested that text messages in SMS have become a new form of social communication in mobile advertising due to the informative, personalized nature of those messages. 13,14 The major limitations of text, however, include lack of graphics, dynamic processes, and attractive designs.…”
Section: Media Types and Attitudesmentioning
confidence: 99%