2016
DOI: 10.1080/0163853x.2016.1171070
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of Social-Cognitive Processing Demands and Structural Importance on Narrative Recall: Differences Between Children, Adolescents, and Adults

Abstract: This study examined the contributions of developmental changes in social-cognitive ability throughout adolescence to the development of narrative comprehension. We measured the effects of sensitivity to the causal structure of narratives and of sensitivity to differences in social-cognitive processing demands on narrative recall by children (8-10 years old), adolescents (13 -15 years old), and adults (19-21 years old). Generalized mixed-effects models for dichotomous variables revealed that social-cognitive pr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
18
0
4

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
(74 reference statements)
2
18
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, theory of mind both directly and indirectly through higher order language measures predicts the development of reading comprehension skills in preschoolers and kindergarteners (Atkinson, Slade, Powell, & Levy, 2017; Kim, 2015). Also, social-cognitive development has been shown to contribute to increasingly successful understanding of a story’s social-cognitive aspects in older school-age individuals (Pavias, van den Broek, Hickendorff, Beker, & Van Leijenhorst, 2016). Finally, in the other direction, listening to storybooks and answering questions about mental states improved preschoolers’ theory of mind (Guajardo & Watson, 2002), and adults’ theory of mind improved after reading literary fiction compared to non-fiction (Black & Barnes, 2015).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, theory of mind both directly and indirectly through higher order language measures predicts the development of reading comprehension skills in preschoolers and kindergarteners (Atkinson, Slade, Powell, & Levy, 2017; Kim, 2015). Also, social-cognitive development has been shown to contribute to increasingly successful understanding of a story’s social-cognitive aspects in older school-age individuals (Pavias, van den Broek, Hickendorff, Beker, & Van Leijenhorst, 2016). Finally, in the other direction, listening to storybooks and answering questions about mental states improved preschoolers’ theory of mind (Guajardo & Watson, 2002), and adults’ theory of mind improved after reading literary fiction compared to non-fiction (Black & Barnes, 2015).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Why (sub-)components were not significantly correlated with the children’s IQ scores in our sample. Previous research has found that incorporation of these elements (explanatory and interpretative clauses about character motivations and causality) within narrative retellings is related to children’s age and sociocognitive development in later childhood ( Genereux and McKeough, 2007 ; Nicolopoulou and Richner, 2007 ; Colletta et al, 2010 ; Pavias et al, 2016 ; Hamilton et al, 2020 ). In order to talk about the whys of the story presented to them, children are required to both comprehend and infer a number of implicit story details and then construe them mentally and linguistically to make them accessible to their narrative audience.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this respect, the ability to express temporal and causal sequencing in a more differentiated way depends on the complexity of linguistic means available to the speaker ( Veneziano and Nicolopoulou, 2019 ). The reasons for children’s struggle with incorporating important details can also be related to limited discursive and sociocognitive skills which enable them to effectively orient their listener and adjust the narrative to their informational needs ( Saywitz and Snyder, 1996 ; Saywitz et al, 1996 ; Genereux and McKeough, 2007 ; Colletta et al, 2010 ; Melzi et al, 2011 ; Pavias et al, 2016 ; Dore et al, 2018 ; Hamilton et al, 2020 ).…”
Section: Introduction and Prior Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All models were random person-random item Rasch models (RPRI; De Boeck, 2008 ), with a random intercept for students, and also a random intercept for items (as the problems were considered a draw from the larger domain of multidigit division). The explanatory variables were added in stepwise fashion (as in Stevenson et al, 2013 , see also Pavias et al, 2016 ), allowing evaluation of the added value of each step by comparing the models based on the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC), and likelihood ratio tests. The AIC and BIC balance model fit and parsimony (lower values are better).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%