Automatic evaluation of aspects of document quality

Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International Conference on Design of Communication - The Engineering of Quality Documentation

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 14-16

  Dufty, David F ^a   McNamara, Danielle ^a   Louwerse, Max ^a   Cai, Ziqiang ^a   Graesser, Arthur C ^a  

^a University of Memphis   (United States)

Author keywords

Cohesion; Document evaluation; Text analysis; Writing tools

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; INFORMATION SERVICES; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; QUALITY OF SERVICE; WORLD WIDE WEB;

COHESION; DOCUMENT EVALUATION; TEXT ANALYSIS; WRITING TOOLS;

TEXT PROCESSING;

EID: 13344285288     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1026533.1026539     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (18)

1. Axelrod, R. B., & Cooper, C. R. (2001). The St Martins Guide to Writing. Bedford/St Martins: Boston, MA.
2. Burstein, J., Kukich, K., Wolff, S., Lu, C., Chodorow, M., Braden-Harder, L., & Harris, M. D. (1998). Automated Scoring Using A Hybrid Feature Identification Technique. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics, August 1998. Montreal, Canada.
3. Flower, L. (1993). Problem-Solving Strategies for Writers. (4th Ed). Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich
4. Foltz, P., Kintsch, W., & Landauer, T. (1998). The measurement of textual coherence with latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 285-307.
5. Foltz, P. W., Laham, D., & Landauer, T. K. (1999). The Intelligent Essay Assessor: Applications to Educational Technology. Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer-Enhanced Learning, 1(2)
6. Graesser, A.C., McNamara, D.S., & Louwerse, M.M. (2003). What do readers need to learn in order to process coherence relations in narrative and expository text. In A.P. Sweet and C.E. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 82-98). New York: Guilford Press.
7. Graesser, A.C., McNamara, D., Louwerse, M., & Cai, Z. (2004). Coh-Metrix: Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers. In press.
8. Kintsch, W. (1998) Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
9. Landauer, T., and S. Dumais. (1997). A solution to Plato's problem: The Latent Semantic Analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 211-240.
10. Louwerse, M.M. (2002). An analytic and cognitive parameterization of coherence relations. Cognitive Linguistics, 12, 291-315.
11. Mann, W. C., & Thompson, S. A. (1988). Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization. Text, 8(3), 243-281.
12. McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M., & Graesser, A. C. (2002). Coh-Metrix: Automated cohesion and coherence scores to predict readability and facilitate comprehension, Unpublished technical report: University of Memphis.
13. McNamara, D. S., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Learning from Text: Effects of prior knowledge and text coherence. Discourse Processes, 22, 247-287.
14. McNamara, D.S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N.B., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? Text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 1-43.
15. Reid, S. (1997). The Prentice-Hall guide for college writers: a customized edition. Pearson Custom Publishing: Needham Heights, MA.
16. Schreiner, M., Rehder, B., Landauer, T., & Laham, D. (1997). How latent semantic analysis (LSA) represents essay semantic content: Technical issues and analysis. In M. Shafto and P. Langley (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp 1041). Mawhwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. Stenner, A. J. (1998). Measuring reading comprehension with the lexile framework. 4th North American Conference on Adolescent/Adult Literacy: Washington, D.C.
18. Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 162-185.