Levels of Processing: The Strategic Demands of Reading Comprehension

Schwartz, R.

doi:10.2307/747273

Cited by 16 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, adjunct One way of interpreting the findings on response modes is related to the amount of elaboration or manipulation they require from the reader: Overt responses require more active participation than covert responses, and short answers require more than multiple choice items. Such an interpretation is consistent with the results of other studies that have-looked directly at the effects of varying degrees of manipulation, elaboration, or "levels of processing" (Craik & Lockhart, 1972) on comprehension or recall (Barnett, di Vesta, & Rogozinski, 1981; di Vesta, Schultz, & Dangel, 1973;Frase, 1970Frase, , 1972Schallert, 1976;Schwartz, 1980;Watts & Anderson, 1971). These studies assume that semantic processing reflects a deeper level than attention to surface features of text, and that the more intermediate steps required to answer a question, the greater the depth of semantic processing involved.…”

Section: Studies Of Writing As a Way Of Reasoningsupporting

confidence: 77%

Writing and Reasoning

Applebee¹

1984

Review of Educational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Studies Of Writing As a Way Of Reasoningsupporting

confidence: 77%

Writing and Reasoning

Applebee¹

1984

Review of Educational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…That may be true, but the comparisons made in her study do not support such conclusions. There are many other child-adult comparisons in recent literature in which the adults are high ability college students (McGee, 1982;Schwartz, 1980;Taylor, 1980), or secondary students (Fletcher, Satz, & Scholes, 1981).…”

Section: Techniques Employedmentioning

confidence: 98%

Methodological Limitations of the Application of Expert Systems Methodology in Reading

Willson

1987

Reading Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, it should be noted that the above conclusion regarding reader ability differences in context usage refers to the effect of context on word recognition. Context can be used to facilitate comprehension as wqll as word recognition (see Schwartz, 1980;Stanovich, 1980), and the ability to use context to facilitate the former process was not addressed in this study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flexibility in the Use of Graphic and Contextual Information by Good and Poor Readers

Schwartz

Stanovich

1981

Journal of Reading Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Two studies are reported that investigate the use of graphic and contextual information in word recognition. Subjects orally read stories that contained ten words that were altered by substituting a single letter, so that another word was formed that was anomalous within the sentence. The critical dependent variable was the proportion of times the subject read the contextually appropriate word rather than the actual stimulus word. The first study used different orienting instructions to manipulate subjects' response set. In the second experiment, instructions for either contextually appropriate reading or accurate reading were given in order to examine the relationships between information processing demands and reading ability. The results indicated that good and poor readers were equally able to conform to task demands for contextually appropriate reading responses, but poor readers were less able to suppress contextual information when accurate reading was required.Contextual and graphic cues represent two different types of information that a reader might draw on to recognize words during reading. Reliance on one type of information to some extent obviates the necessity of using information of the other type. The research presented in this paper investigated the use of graphic and contextual information in word recognition, and the extent to which good and poor readers are flexible in their ability to trade off one type of information for another when the situation warrants.The research to be reported made use of a paradigm employed by Allington and Strange (1977). They had both good and poor fourth-grade readers respond to passages where a letter was changed in five percent of the words so that the letter string was transformed into a different word that made the sentence anomalous. Examples of such sentences are, "He leaned too fan over the edge of the wall," and

show abstract

Levels of Processing: The Strategic Demands of Reading Comprehension

Cited by 16 publications

References 13 publications

Writing and Reasoning

Writing and Reasoning

Methodological Limitations of the Application of Expert Systems Methodology in Reading

Flexibility in the Use of Graphic and Contextual Information by Good and Poor Readers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About