The present study investigated comprehension processes and strategy use of second-grade low- and high-comprehending readers when reading expository and narrative texts for comprehension. Results from think-aloud protocols indicated that text genre affected the way the readers processed the texts. When reading narrative texts they made more text-based and knowledge-based inferences, and when reading expository texts they made more comments and asked more questions, but also made a higher number of invalid knowledge-based inferences. Furthermore, low- and high-comprehending readers did not differ in the patterns of text-processing strategies used: all readers used a variety of comprehension strategies, ranging from literal repetitions to elaborate knowledge-based inferences. There was one exception: for expository texts, low-comprehending readers generated a higher number of inaccurate elaborative and predictive inferences. Finally, the results confirmed and extended prior research by showing that low-comprehending readers can be classified either as readers who construct a limited mental representation that mainly reflects the literal meaning of the text (struggling paraphrasers), or as readers who attempt to enrich their mental representation by generating elaborative and predictive inferences (struggling elaborators). A similar dichotomy was observed for high-comprehending readers.

The present study investigated on-line text processing of second-grade low-and high-comprehending readers by recording their eye movements as they read expository and narrative texts. For narrative texts, the reading patterns of low-and high-comprehending readers revealed robust differences consistent with prior findings for good versus struggling readers (e.g., longer firstand second-pass reading times for low-comprehending readers). For expository texts, however, the differences in the reading patterns of low-and high-comprehending readers were attenuated. These results suggest that low-comprehending readers adopt a suboptimal processing approach for expository texts: relative to their processing approach for narrative texts, they either do not adjust their reading strategy or they adjust towards a more cursory strategy. Both processing approaches are suboptimal because expository texts tend to demand more, rather than less, cognitive effort of the reader than narrative texts. We discuss implications for (reading) education. 1.1. Individual differences in reading and eye movements It generally is presumed that readers employ strategies to facilitate comprehension, either consciously or unconsciously (Pressley & Afflerbach, 1995). Sources of individual differences in reading comprehension include general cognitive factors (e.g., background

Beginning readers might benefit from digital texts presented in a sentence-bysentence fashion. But why? Highlights  In a segmented layout, texts are presented chunk by chunk.  Pupils in Grades 2 and 3 (7-9 years old) benefit from a segmented layout.  Segmented texts probe higher-order comprehension by inducing more accurate reading.  Reading skills and text genre influence the efficacy of the layout of a text.  Segmented texts are particularly useful in the early stages of reading acquisition.

No abstract