Assessing short summaries with human judgments procedure and latent semantic analysis in narrative and expository texts

Behavior Research Methods

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 616-627

  León, José A ^a   Olmos, Ricardo ^a   Escudero, Inmaculada ^a   Cañas, José J ^b   Salmerón, Lalo ^b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34147205410     PISSN: 1554351X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03193894     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. BROWN, A. L., & DAY, J. D. (1983). Macrorules for summarizing texts: The development of expertise. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 22, 1-14.
2. BRUNER, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
3. EINSTEIN, G. O., MCDANIEL, M. A., OWEN, P. D., & COTÉ, N. C. (1990). Encoding and recall of texts: The importance of material appropriate processing. Journal of Memory & Language, 29, 566-581.
4. ESCUDERO, I. (2004). Procesamiento de inferencias elaborativas en la comprensión del discurso y según el tipo de texto [Elaborative inference processing in discourse comprehension and type of text]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.
5. Fletcher, C. R., Chrysler, S. T., van den Broek, P., Deaton, J. A., & Bloom, C. P. (1995). The role of co-occurrence, coreference, and causality in coherence of conjoined sentences. In R. F. Lorch, Jr. & E. J. O'Brien (Eds.), Sources of coherence in reading (pp. 203-218). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. FOLTZ, P. W. (1996). Latent semantic analysis for text-based research. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28, 197-202.
7. FOLTZ, P. W., GILLIAM, S., &. KENDALL, S. (2000). Supporting content-based feedback in on-line writing evaluation with LSA. Interactive Learning Environments, 8, 111-127.
8. FOLTZ, P. W., KINTSCH, W., & LANDAUER, T. K. (1998). The measurement of textual coherence with latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 285-307.
9. GLENBERG, A. M., & ROBERTSON, D. A. (2000). Symbol grounding and meaning: A comparison of high-dimensional and embodied theories of meaning. Journal of Memory & Language, 43, 379-401.
10. GOLDMAN, S., & BISANZ, G. (2002). Toward a functional analysis of scientific genres: Implications for understanding and learning processes. In J. Otero, J. A. León, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 19-50). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. GRAESSER, A. C., SINGER, M., & TRABASSO, T. (1994). "Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension." Psychological Review, 101, 371-395.
12. GRAESSER, A. C., WIEMER-HASTINGS, P., WIEMER-HASTINGS, K., HARTER, D., PERSON, N., & THE TUTORING RESEARCH GROUP (2000). Using latent semantic analysis to evaluate the contributions of students in AutoTutor. Interactive Learning Environments, 8, 129-147.
13. HARTLEY, J., & TRUEMAN, M. (1983). The effects of headings in text on recall, search and retrieval. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 53, 205-214.
14. KINTSCH, E., STEINHART, D., STAHL, G., MATTHEWS, C., LAMB, R., & THE LSA RESEARCH GROUP (2000). Developing summarization skills through the use of LSA-based feedback. Interactive Learning Environments, 8, 87-109.
15. KUCAN, L., & BECK, I. L. (1996). Four fourth graders thinking aloud: An investigation of genre effects. Journal of Literacy Research, 28, 259-287.
16. LANDAUER, T. K. (1998). Learning and representing verbal meaning: The latent semantic analysis theory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7, 161-164.
17. LANDAUER, T. K., & DUMAIS, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 211-240.
18. LANDAUER, T. K., FOLTZ, P. W., & LAHAM, D. (l 998). An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 259-284.
19. LANDAUER, T. K., LAHAM, D., & FOLTZ, P. W. (1998). Computer-based grading of the conceptual content of essays. Unpublished manuscript
20. LANDAUER, T. K., & PSOTKA, J. (2000). Simulating text understanding for educational applications with Latent Semantic Analysis: Introduction to LSA. Interactive Learning Environments, 8, 73-86.
21. LEÓN, J. A., & CARRETERO, M. (1995). Intervention in comprehension and memory strategies: Knowledge and use of text structure. Learning & Instruction, 5, 203-220.
22. LEÓN, J. A., ESCUDERO, I., & VAN DEN BROEK, P. (2003). La influencia del género del texto en el establecimiento de inferencias elaborativas [The influence of type of text on the establishment of elaborative inferences]. In J. A. León (Ed.), Conocimiento y discurso: Claves para inferiry comprender (pp. 153-170). Madrid: Pirámide.
23. LEÓN, J. A., & PEÑALBA, G. E. (2002). Understanding causality and temporal sequence in scientific discourse. In J. Otero, J. A. León, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 155-178). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. LEÓN, J. A., & THE READING LITERACY RESEARCH GROUP (2004). La competencia lectora y los procesos de comprensión: Un proyecto de investigación basado en la evaluación de los tipos de comprensión [Reading literacy and leading processes: A research project on assessment of types of comprehension]. Unpublished manuscript.
25. LEÓN, J. A., & SLISKO, J. (2000). La dificultad comprensiva de los textos de cicncias: Nuevas alternativas para un viejo problema educativo [The difficulty of understanding science texts: New alternatives for an old education problem]. Psicologia Educativa, 6, 7-26.
26. MAGLIANO, J. P., WIEMER-HASTINGS, K., MILLIS, K. K., MUÑOZ, B. D., & MCNAMARA, D. [S.] (2002). Using latent semantic analysis to assess reader strategies. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 34, 181-188.
27. MARTINS, I. (2002). Visual imagery in school science texts. In J. Otero, J. A. León, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 73-90). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
28. MILLIS, K. K., KIM, H.-J. J., TODARO, S., MAGLIANO, J. P., WIEMERHASTINGS, K., & MCNAMARA, D. S. (2004). Identifying reading strategies using latent semantic analysis: Comparing semantic benchmarks. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 213-221.
29. PALINCSAR, A. S., & BROWN, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition & Instruction, 1, 117-175.
30. PERFETTI, C. A. (1998). The limits of co-occurrence: Tools and theories in language research. Discourse Processes, 25, 363-377.
31. POLKINGHORNE, D. (1988). Narrative knowing and the human sciences. Albany: State University of New York Press.
32. REHDER, B., SCHREINER, M. E., WOLFE, M. B. W., LAHAM, D., LANDAUER, T. K., & KINTSCH, W. (1998). Using latent semantic analysis to assess knowledge: Some technical considerations. Discourse Processes, 25, 337-354.
33. STEYVERS, M., SHIFFRIN, R. M., & NELSON, D. L. (2005). Word association spaces for predicting semantic similarity effects in episodic memory. In A. F. Healy (Ed.), Experimental cognitive psychology and its applications (pp. 237-249). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
34. TRABASSO, T., SECCO, T., & VAN DEN BROEK, P. (1984). Causal cohesion and story coherence. In H. Mandl, N. L. Stein, & T. Trabasso (Eds.), Learning and comprehension of text (pp. 83-107). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
35. VAN DIJK, T. A., & KINTSCH, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
36. WOLFE, M. B. W. (2005). Memory for narrative and expository text: Independent influences of semantic associations and text organization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 31, 359-364.