Article Citation
O’Reilly, T. and Danielle S. McNamara. 2007. “Reversing the Reverse Cohesion Effect: Good Texts Can Be Better for Strategic, High-Knowledge Readers.” Discourse Processes 43(2): 121-152.
Summary of the Article
In a 2007 study, Tenaha O’ Reilly and Danielle S. McNamara evaluated the validity of the reverse cohesion effect. The reverse cohesion effect refers to the increased level of comprehension exhibited by high-knowledge readers when they read a low-cohesion text (122). O’Reilly and McNamara used a high- and a low-cohesion text—an excerpt from a high school biology text on cell mitosis (cell division)—to study the comprehension for students at Old Dominion University. For the high-cohesion texts, the excerpt was revised by:
(a) replacing pronouns with noun phrases,
(b) adding descriptive elaborations,
(c) adding sentence connectives,
(d) replacing or inserting words to increase conceptual overlap,
(e) adding topic headers,
(f) adding theme sentences, and
(g) moving or rearranging sentences. (8).
O’Reilly and McNamara discovered that only high-knowledge readers with less reading skill exhibited the reverse cohesion effect. Those readers remembered more after reading a low-cohesion text than after reading a high-cohesion text. Based on the results of their study and how the interaction between prior knowledge, text cohesion, and reading skill affect comprehension of material, they recommend that writers and editors compose documents that are highly cohesive while keeping in mind the amount of prior knowledge that a reader may have (24).
Analysis and Reflection
The sample size for this study was much larger than the other three I have posted so far. The researchers had 143 students who were participants in this study. Again, the data analysis was appropriate for the design. The researchers used a mixed design (2x2x2x2) and analyzed the data with ANOVAs and correlations to determine relationships between question type, text type, comprehension skill and science knowledge. The article is a continuation of research that was begun with the 1996 article by McNamara et al. This will also be an article that will be useful for my research project for ENG 574.
Showing posts with label reader comprehension. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reader comprehension. Show all posts
Sunday, February 13, 2011
ENG 574: Prior knowledge, reading skill, and text cohesion in the comprenhension of science texts - Sarah Felicelli
Article Citation
Ozuru, Yasuhiro, Kyle Dempsey, and Danielle S. McNamara. 2009. “Prior Knowledge,
Reading Skill, and Text Cohesion in the Comprehension of Science Texts.” Learning and
Instruction 19: 228-242.
Summary of article
Ozuru, Dempsey and McNamara looked at the influence of reader characteristics (prior knowledge and reading skill) and text characteristics (text cohesion and text difficulty) on reading comprehension of a biology text. They selected an excerpt from a biology text and created a high-cohesion version and a low-cohesion version. Students from two different universities participated in the study.
All participants were tested to determine their level of reading skill and their level of prior knowledge of the subject prior to reading the text. Comprehension questions consisted of text-based questions (directly from information in a sentence), local-bridging questions (student had to link information found “within five clauses…(generally adjacent sentences)”), and far- or global-bridging questions (students had to link information that was “more than five clauses apart, and more than two sentences apart”) (232-233).
Researchers learned, for text-based questions, reading comprehension was higher when a high-cohesion text was read before the test. However, there was not a positive correlation between text cohesion and comprehension for bridging questions. Ozuru, Dempsey, and McNamara believe the amount of a reader’s prior knowledge combined with the difficult nature of science text led to this result. A reader with little previous knowledge of science focuses more on understanding the information at the text level and less on trying to make inferences between different topics in a document (239).
For readers with low reading skill, however, the researchers found that a high-cohesion text can actually hinder their ability to recall content, because the length of the document also typically increases. A longer text increases the difficulty level for students with low reading skill, which leads to decreased comprehension.
Analysis and Reflection
This is a recent study which was published two years ago. The data analysis used in this study seems appropriate for the mixed model design that was used (2X2X2X3 - text cohesion X level of knowledge X reading skill X types of comprehension questions). The researchers used ANOVAs to analyze the data. They also used regression analysis; however, I am not as familiar with that statistical analysis, so I am unable to determine if that was appropriate or not. The reliability (Cronbach's alpha) of the reading skill test and the topic-specific knowledge test questions were both high (0.90 and 0.73 respectively); however, the reliability for the biology knowledge questions used in the test was only 0.61, which seems rather low. It would be interesting to see if increasing the reliability of the biology knowledge questions would have any effect on the results of the study.
Again, this seems to be an appropriate article for my research project as it addresses the influence of text cohesion (which includes syntax and semantics) on the comprehension of science text.
Ozuru, Yasuhiro, Kyle Dempsey, and Danielle S. McNamara. 2009. “Prior Knowledge,
Reading Skill, and Text Cohesion in the Comprehension of Science Texts.” Learning and
Instruction 19: 228-242.
Summary of article
Ozuru, Dempsey and McNamara looked at the influence of reader characteristics (prior knowledge and reading skill) and text characteristics (text cohesion and text difficulty) on reading comprehension of a biology text. They selected an excerpt from a biology text and created a high-cohesion version and a low-cohesion version. Students from two different universities participated in the study.
All participants were tested to determine their level of reading skill and their level of prior knowledge of the subject prior to reading the text. Comprehension questions consisted of text-based questions (directly from information in a sentence), local-bridging questions (student had to link information found “within five clauses…(generally adjacent sentences)”), and far- or global-bridging questions (students had to link information that was “more than five clauses apart, and more than two sentences apart”) (232-233).
Researchers learned, for text-based questions, reading comprehension was higher when a high-cohesion text was read before the test. However, there was not a positive correlation between text cohesion and comprehension for bridging questions. Ozuru, Dempsey, and McNamara believe the amount of a reader’s prior knowledge combined with the difficult nature of science text led to this result. A reader with little previous knowledge of science focuses more on understanding the information at the text level and less on trying to make inferences between different topics in a document (239).
For readers with low reading skill, however, the researchers found that a high-cohesion text can actually hinder their ability to recall content, because the length of the document also typically increases. A longer text increases the difficulty level for students with low reading skill, which leads to decreased comprehension.
Analysis and Reflection
This is a recent study which was published two years ago. The data analysis used in this study seems appropriate for the mixed model design that was used (2X2X2X3 - text cohesion X level of knowledge X reading skill X types of comprehension questions). The researchers used ANOVAs to analyze the data. They also used regression analysis; however, I am not as familiar with that statistical analysis, so I am unable to determine if that was appropriate or not. The reliability (Cronbach's alpha) of the reading skill test and the topic-specific knowledge test questions were both high (0.90 and 0.73 respectively); however, the reliability for the biology knowledge questions used in the test was only 0.61, which seems rather low. It would be interesting to see if increasing the reliability of the biology knowledge questions would have any effect on the results of the study.
Again, this seems to be an appropriate article for my research project as it addresses the influence of text cohesion (which includes syntax and semantics) on the comprehension of science text.
ENG 574: Are Good Texts Always Better? - Sarah Felicelli
Article Citation
McNamara, Danielle S., Eileen Kintsch, Nancy Butler Songer, and Walter Kintsch. 1996. “Are Good Texts Always Better? Interactions of Text Coherence, Background Knowledge, and Levels of Understanding in Learning from Text.” Cognition and Instruction 14 (1): 1-43.
Summary of Article
McNamara et al. conducted two studies to examine the relationships between text coherence, prior knowledge, and levels of understanding in reading comprehension of science text. Text coherence is related to semantics, or the meaning of the text of a document. In other words, the more a text makes sense to readers, the more coherent the text is considered to be.
In the first study (Study A), the researchers tested the comprehension of students who read an excerpt from a biology textbook. Three groups of students each read a different version of the same text: the original version (590 words), a revised version (821 words), and an expanded version (1,167 words). For the revised version, information was added to the text to clarify the subtopics; whereas for the expanded version, content was added to explain the connection between different concepts. All three texts were locally coherent (the content made sense at the level of the text); however, the revised and expanded texts were also globally coherent (the content made sense in relation to information beyond the text). Each student took a pre-test and a post-test. Both the pre- and post-tests had multiple choice, true-false, fill-in-the-blank, and short-answer questions as well as a sorting task that the students completed. For the sorting task, students arranged terminology cards into three categories (9-10).
Researchers found that students who read the revised version scored better on the post-test questions than those who read the original version. Students also improved on the sorting task. For the expanded text, in some cases, comprehension was not as high as for that of the revised text. One explanation suggested by the investigators was that the increased word count of the expanded text raised the level of difficulty for students with a reduced reading skill.
In the second study, the researchers also examined the influence of prior knowledge on the ability of students to recall information from a less coherent text. To test this, they created four versions of a text with the same content (heart disease) but with different levels of local and global coherence. For the high-coherent versions, they revised the text by:
• Replacing pronouns with noun phrases to decrease ambiguity.
• Adding descriptions to connect unfamiliar concepts with familiar ones
• Adding sentence connectives to clarify relationships
• “Replacing words to increase argument overlap (e.g., replacing person and cases with baby or babies).” (21).
Pre- and post-test questions differed from Study A in that they included text-based questions (based on one sentence in the text), elaborative-inference questions (based on content from the text and outside knowledge), bridging-inference questions (based on topics linked between two or more sentences), and problem-solving questions (based on information from the text that was described in a new context). A sorting task was included for Study B as well (22).
McNamara et al. found that for bridging-inference questions, problem-solving questions, and the sorting task, low-knowledge readers needed a high-coherent text to do well, whereas high-knowledge readers fared better with a low-coherent text. The investigators reasoned that for high-knowledge readers, a low-coherent text increased their comprehension, because they filled in the coherency gaps on their own and were more actively involved in learning the material (34).
Analysis:
Dr. Danielle S. McNamara is a professor with the Department of Psychology at University of Memphis. Her expertise is in cognitive psychology and her research interests include the processes of reading comprehension, memory, and knowledge acquisition. Drs. Eileen and Walter Kintsch are researchers with the Institute of Cognitive Science at the University of Colorado, Boulder, and Dr. Nancy Butler Songer is a professor at the University of Michigan who specializes in science education.
The literature review for this article is both thorough and beneficial to further understanding my research topic and the hypotheses for the studies. Both studies had participants who were between 6th and 10th grades. The first study had a sample size of 36 and the second had 56 participants. For both studies, the data analysis that was performed was appropriate for the study design (separate ANOVAs for a 3X2X2 design for Study A and separate ANOVAs for a 3X3 design for Study B).
Reflection
This article is appropriate for my research project as it directly relates to comprehension of science text. However, the research is somewhat dated—it was published in 1996. For my final project, I am considering the possibility of replicating a part of one of the studies done by the researchers in this article. The experimental designs for both studies are somewhat complex, so I may not be able to manage a replication in the short time period allotted for the ENG 574 final project. If I were to replicate one of these studies, I would change the population to college students to see if there is a difference in the results. Also, I would likely choose only one aspect of one of the two studies to simplify the study.
McNamara, Danielle S., Eileen Kintsch, Nancy Butler Songer, and Walter Kintsch. 1996. “Are Good Texts Always Better? Interactions of Text Coherence, Background Knowledge, and Levels of Understanding in Learning from Text.” Cognition and Instruction 14 (1): 1-43.
Summary of Article
McNamara et al. conducted two studies to examine the relationships between text coherence, prior knowledge, and levels of understanding in reading comprehension of science text. Text coherence is related to semantics, or the meaning of the text of a document. In other words, the more a text makes sense to readers, the more coherent the text is considered to be.
In the first study (Study A), the researchers tested the comprehension of students who read an excerpt from a biology textbook. Three groups of students each read a different version of the same text: the original version (590 words), a revised version (821 words), and an expanded version (1,167 words). For the revised version, information was added to the text to clarify the subtopics; whereas for the expanded version, content was added to explain the connection between different concepts. All three texts were locally coherent (the content made sense at the level of the text); however, the revised and expanded texts were also globally coherent (the content made sense in relation to information beyond the text). Each student took a pre-test and a post-test. Both the pre- and post-tests had multiple choice, true-false, fill-in-the-blank, and short-answer questions as well as a sorting task that the students completed. For the sorting task, students arranged terminology cards into three categories (9-10).
Researchers found that students who read the revised version scored better on the post-test questions than those who read the original version. Students also improved on the sorting task. For the expanded text, in some cases, comprehension was not as high as for that of the revised text. One explanation suggested by the investigators was that the increased word count of the expanded text raised the level of difficulty for students with a reduced reading skill.
In the second study, the researchers also examined the influence of prior knowledge on the ability of students to recall information from a less coherent text. To test this, they created four versions of a text with the same content (heart disease) but with different levels of local and global coherence. For the high-coherent versions, they revised the text by:
• Replacing pronouns with noun phrases to decrease ambiguity.
• Adding descriptions to connect unfamiliar concepts with familiar ones
• Adding sentence connectives to clarify relationships
• “Replacing words to increase argument overlap (e.g., replacing person and cases with baby or babies).” (21).
Pre- and post-test questions differed from Study A in that they included text-based questions (based on one sentence in the text), elaborative-inference questions (based on content from the text and outside knowledge), bridging-inference questions (based on topics linked between two or more sentences), and problem-solving questions (based on information from the text that was described in a new context). A sorting task was included for Study B as well (22).
McNamara et al. found that for bridging-inference questions, problem-solving questions, and the sorting task, low-knowledge readers needed a high-coherent text to do well, whereas high-knowledge readers fared better with a low-coherent text. The investigators reasoned that for high-knowledge readers, a low-coherent text increased their comprehension, because they filled in the coherency gaps on their own and were more actively involved in learning the material (34).
Analysis:
Dr. Danielle S. McNamara is a professor with the Department of Psychology at University of Memphis. Her expertise is in cognitive psychology and her research interests include the processes of reading comprehension, memory, and knowledge acquisition. Drs. Eileen and Walter Kintsch are researchers with the Institute of Cognitive Science at the University of Colorado, Boulder, and Dr. Nancy Butler Songer is a professor at the University of Michigan who specializes in science education.
The literature review for this article is both thorough and beneficial to further understanding my research topic and the hypotheses for the studies. Both studies had participants who were between 6th and 10th grades. The first study had a sample size of 36 and the second had 56 participants. For both studies, the data analysis that was performed was appropriate for the study design (separate ANOVAs for a 3X2X2 design for Study A and separate ANOVAs for a 3X3 design for Study B).
Reflection
This article is appropriate for my research project as it directly relates to comprehension of science text. However, the research is somewhat dated—it was published in 1996. For my final project, I am considering the possibility of replicating a part of one of the studies done by the researchers in this article. The experimental designs for both studies are somewhat complex, so I may not be able to manage a replication in the short time period allotted for the ENG 574 final project. If I were to replicate one of these studies, I would change the population to college students to see if there is a difference in the results. Also, I would likely choose only one aspect of one of the two studies to simplify the study.
ENG 574: Potential Research Topic for Final Project - Sarah Felicelli
Topic
I am interested in researching the effect of syntax and semantics on reader comprehension and recall of scientific text because I want to learn how to effectively communicate complex scientific concepts (specifically related to biology, medicine and health) to people with no background in science, so that people in the general public can make educated decisions about nutrition and their overall health.
Why I am Interested in This Topic
This is a topic that I began researching last semester in Dr. Nord’s Editing Technical Publications course. We read an article by Carol Isakson and Jan Spyridakis (1999) who found that decisions made about syntax and semantics in the writing and editing process have an effect on the ability of the reader to recall or comprehend the information presented to them. For example, they found that readers would more accurately remember information that is included in an independent clause or that is placed in the first or last paragraph of a text (Isakson and Spyridakis 1999, 377). In the case of scientific documents, the ability of non-scientists to comprehend and recall information is essential to their understanding of scientific topics. As a biology instructor, I have always been interested in figuring out ways to make complex topics easier to understand, and as a technical communicator, I am interested in doing that as well. For my final project for ENG 574, I am considering taking the study from one of the articles on text cohesion and reader comprehension of science text and replicate the experiment that the researchers did.
Possible Research Questions for This Topic:
• How do syntax and semantics affect reader comprehension of health brochures?
• How do syntax and semantics affect reader understanding of healthcare information documents?
• How do syntax and semantics affect reader comprehension of science text?
I am interested in researching the effect of syntax and semantics on reader comprehension and recall of scientific text because I want to learn how to effectively communicate complex scientific concepts (specifically related to biology, medicine and health) to people with no background in science, so that people in the general public can make educated decisions about nutrition and their overall health.
Why I am Interested in This Topic
This is a topic that I began researching last semester in Dr. Nord’s Editing Technical Publications course. We read an article by Carol Isakson and Jan Spyridakis (1999) who found that decisions made about syntax and semantics in the writing and editing process have an effect on the ability of the reader to recall or comprehend the information presented to them. For example, they found that readers would more accurately remember information that is included in an independent clause or that is placed in the first or last paragraph of a text (Isakson and Spyridakis 1999, 377). In the case of scientific documents, the ability of non-scientists to comprehend and recall information is essential to their understanding of scientific topics. As a biology instructor, I have always been interested in figuring out ways to make complex topics easier to understand, and as a technical communicator, I am interested in doing that as well. For my final project for ENG 574, I am considering taking the study from one of the articles on text cohesion and reader comprehension of science text and replicate the experiment that the researchers did.
Possible Research Questions for This Topic:
• How do syntax and semantics affect reader comprehension of health brochures?
• How do syntax and semantics affect reader understanding of healthcare information documents?
• How do syntax and semantics affect reader comprehension of science text?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)