Context in Reading and Listening: Variations in Approach to Cloze Tasks

Neville, Mary H.; Pugh, A. K.

doi:10.2307/747495

Cited by 37 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies have indicated that these code levels are used in reaching word recognition decisions (Klein, Klein, & Bertino, 1974;Neville & Pugh, 1976;Weber, 1970). The critical difference between beginning and fluent readers appears to be the level at which criterion decisions are focused.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Levels of Processing: The Strategic Demands of Reading Comprehension

Schwartz¹

1980

Reading Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The research presented here is designed to measure the effect on reading comprehension of forcing attention to different levels of analysis.Since texts can be analyzed at a variety of levels, such as letters, spelling patterns, words, etc., comprehension requires a basic strategic coordination of processing activities. Forty second grade, fifth grade, and college students read and recalled stories under four sets of orienting instructions.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Levels of Processing: The Strategic Demands of Reading Comprehension

Schwartz¹

1980

Reading Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Weber found that better readers were more likely to correct their initial incorrect response if it was grammatically unacceptable with respect to the succeeding context than were poor readers-good readers corrected 85 per cent of such errors whereas poor readers corrected only 42 per cent of them; but, as Weber points out, the poorer readers may simply have had a different standard of what is acceptable as oral reading-the fact that they did not correct their errors does not necessarily mean that they did not notice them. Neville and Pugh (1975) report results which they claim provide evidence that poor readers make inferior use of the succeeding context. They administered two cloze tests to 9-year-old children.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Moyle (1968), Weber (1970), Neville and Pugh (1975) and Southgate-Booth and Arnold (1975) have all suggested that poorer readers might not make good use of the succeeding context. What is meant here by " making use of the succeeding context" is a situation where the reader is able to look ahead as far as he likes and can take as long as he likes before responding.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Use of the Linguistic Context: Do Good and Poor Readers Use Different Strategies?

Potter

1982

Brit J of Edu Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY. -This study investigates whether good and poor readers use different strategies when making use of the linguistic context, and in particular whether good readers make better use of the succeeding context by using a better strategy or whether they do so simply because of their superior knowledge. A cloze test was specially constructed to control for the readers' knowledge and, after successive refinements, was administered to 121 7-and 8-year-old children in their first year at junior school. The children were better at using the preceding context than the succeeding context (P

show abstract

“…The abilities measured by two tests with the same item format can then be divided into two kinds: abilities related to the latent trait measured (reading ability) and abilities related to the item format. Of course, two tests with the same format for the same latent trait will not correlate perfectly because of differences in texts (Biemiller, 1977;Klein-Braley, 1983;Neville & Pugh, 1977) or differences in items. Therefore, effect size was related to the differences in abilities between two reading comprehension tests.…”

Section: Model Fitmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Construct Validity of Multiple- Choice Items for Reading Comprehension

Bergh

1990

Applied Psychological Measurement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study 590 third-grade students took one of four reading comprehension tests with either multiplechoice items or open-ended items. Each also took 32 tests indicating 16 semantic Structure-of-Intellect (si) abilities. Four conditions or groups were distinguished on the basis of the reading comprehension tests. The four 33 x 33 correlation matrices were analyzed simultaneously with a four-group LISREL model. The 16 intellectual abilities explained approximately 62% of the variance in true reading comprehension scores. None of the SI abilities proved to be differentially related to item type. Therefore, it was concluded that item type for reading comprehension is congeneric with respect to the SI abilities measured. Index terms: construct validity, item format, free response, reading comprehension, Structure-of-Intellect model.Since the early 1920s the question of whether items in different formats tap the same mental functions has been an active area of research. Unfortunately, the results of different studies are equivocal. Some authors have claimed that there are no differences between tests with different item formats (

show abstract

Context in Reading and Listening: Variations in Approach to Cloze Tasks

Cited by 37 publications

References 11 publications

Levels of Processing: The Strategic Demands of Reading Comprehension

Levels of Processing: The Strategic Demands of Reading Comprehension

The Use of the Linguistic Context: Do Good and Poor Readers Use Different Strategies?

On the Construct Validity of Multiple- Choice Items for Reading Comprehension

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About