The interplay of reader goals, working memory, and text structure during reading

Abstract

In the current study we examined the complex interactions of instructional context, text properties, and reader characteristics during comprehension. College students were tasked with the goal of reading for study versus entertainment (instructional context) while thinking-aloud about four different expository text structures (text properties). Working memory also was assessed (reader characteristics). Reading goals and working memory interacted to influence paraphrasing and non-coherence processes when thinking aloud. Reading goals, working memory, and text structure all interacted to influence text-based inferences. Text structure also influenced knowledge-based inferences. Post-reading recall was highest for those with the instructional goal of reading for study (compared to entertainment), as well as for problem-response and compare-contrast texts (compared to descriptive and chronological texts). Implications of the findings are discussed.

The Effects of Orienting Instructions on Readers’ Ability to Recall Literal Information from Expository Texts

“…Since reading is based on several abilities (Bohn-Gettler & Kendeou, 2014;McCrudden & Schraw, 2007;McCrudden, Magliano & Schraw, 2010), Experiment 2 examined the relationship between two reading motivation components and a reader's ability to recall the information presented in collective expository texts at a 'superficial comprehension' level (the lowest level of text comprehension). Besides motivation components, non-verbal working memory, non-verbal analytic reasoning and assumption recognition from verbal statements were also examined.…”

“…This indicates that an individual's working memory capacity affects his or her level of reading comprehension (Hyönä, Lorch & Kaakinen, 2002). Additionally, individual differences in readers' abilities to build associations are thought to affect the reading strategies they employ (Bohn-Gettler & Kendeou 2014). Therefore, in the current study, cognitive abilities related to working memory capacity and reasoning abilities were expected to be correlated with the scores of the post-reading MC literal questions.…”

“…Some studies have used online measures to assess participants' interest in the reading passages, such as thinking aloud while reading (Kucan & Beck, 2003) and time of reading (Budd, Whitney & Turley, 1995;Dhanapala & Yamada, 2015;Kendeou, Muis & Fulton, 2011;McKoon & Ratcliff, 1992;Minguela et al, 2015), and offline measures such as summarization (Bohn-Gettler & Kendeou 2014;Bransford & Hohnson, 1972). Occasionally, some studies failed to prove a relationship existed between the outcomes of online and offline measures (Kendeou, Muis & Fulton, 2011).…”

Knowledge

“…Scholars find that making comparisons while taking notes improves learning over simple linear methods (Robinson & Kiewra, 1995). Furthermore, texts structured in a compare-contrast form tend to be associated with improved recall, compared to texts organized linearly or descriptively (Bohn-Gettler & Kendeou, 2014).…”

“…The justification for these prompts encouraging learning is tied to research in education that shows that students learn differently depending on their goals (Bohn-Gettler & Kendeou, 2014). Participants were simply asked either to provide feedback or to critically evaluate the material at several points throughout the reading.…”