Critical reading effort during text revision

European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 765-792

  Roussey, Jean Yves ^a,b   Piolat, Annie ^a  

^a AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITY   (France)

^b University of Provence Aix Marseille University   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COGNITION; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; READING; SCORING SYSTEM; SKILL; TASK PERFORMANCE; WORKING MEMORY;

EID: 45849148906     PISSN: 09541446     EISSN: 14640635     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09541440701696135     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Alamargot, D., & Chanquoy, L. (2001). Through the models of writing. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
2. Baddeley, A. D. (1996). Exploring the central executive. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 5-28.
3. Baddeley, A. D. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), 417-423.
4. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
5. Berninger, V.W., & Swanson, H. L. (1994). Modification of the Hayes and Flower model to explain beginning and developing writing. In E. Butterfield (Ed.), Advances in cognition and educational practice: Vol. 2. Children's writing: Toward a process theory of development of skilled writing (pp. 57-82). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
6. Berninger, V. W., Whitaker, D., Feng, Y., Swanson, H. L., & Abbott, R. D. (1996). Assessment of planning, translating and revising in junior high writers. Journal of School Psychology, 34(1), 23-52.
7. Butterfield, E. C., Hacker, D. J., & Albertson, L. R. (1996). Environmental, cognitive, and metacognitive influences on text revision: Assessing the evidence. Educational Psychology Review, 8(3), 239-260.
8. Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in comprehending and producing words in context. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 1-18.
9. Daneman, M., & Merikle, P. M. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis. Psychonomics Bulletin and Review, 3, 422-433.
10. Daneman, M., & Stainton, M. (1993). The generation effect in reading and proofreading. Is it easier or harder to detect errors in one's own writing? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 5, 297-313.
11. Desmette, D., Hupet, M., Schelstraete, M. A., & van der Linden, M. (1995). Adaptation en langue française du "Reading Span Test" de Daneman et Carpenter (1980) [French adaptation of Daneman and Carpenter's Reading Span Test]. L'Année Psychologique, 95, 459-482.
12. Engle, R. W., Cantor, J., & Carullo, J. (1992). Individual differences in working memory and comprehension: A test of four hypotheses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(5), 972-992.
13. Faigley, L., & Witte, S. (1984). Measuring the effects of revisions on text structure. In R. Beach & L. S. Bridwell (Eds.), New directions in composing research (pp. 95-108). New York: Guilford Press.
14. Flower, L. S., & Hayes, J. R. (1980). The dynamics of composing: Making plans and juggling constraints. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 31-50). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
15. Flower, L. S., Hayes, J. R., Carey, L., Schriver, K., & Stratman, J. (1986). Detection, diagnosis, and the strategies of revision. College Composition and Communication, 37(1), 16-55.
16. Glynn, S. M., Britton, B. K., Muth, D., & Dogan, N. (1982). Writing and revising persuasive documents: Cognitive demands. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 551-567.
17. Hacker, D. J. (1994). Comprehension monitoring as a writing process. Advances in Cognition and Educational Practice, 6, 143-172.
18. Hacker, D.J., Plumb, C., Butterfield, E. C., Quathamer, D., & Heineken, E. (1994). Text revision: Detection and correction of errors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(1), 65-78.
19. Hayes, J. R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing. Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 1-27). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
20. Hayes, J. R. (2004). What triggers revision? In L. Allal, L. Chanquoy, & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes (pp. 9-20). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
21. Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
22. Hayes, J. R., Flower, L. S., Schriver, K. A., Stratman, J., & Carey, L. (1987). Cognitive processes in revision. In S. Rosenberg (Ed.), Advances in psycholinguistics: Vol. 2. Reading, writing and language processing (pp. 176-240). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
23. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1987). The psychology of reading and language comprehension. Newton, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
24. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99, 122-149.
25. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
26. Kellogg, R. T. (1987). Effects of topic knowledge on the allocation of processing time and cognitive effort to writing processes. Memory and Cognition, 15, 256-266.
27. Kellogg, R. T. (1994). The psychology of writing. New York: Oxford University Press.
28. Kellogg, R. T. (1996). A model of working memory in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 57-71). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
29. Kellogg, R. T. (2001). Long-term working memory in text production. Memory and Cognition, 29(1), 43-52.
30. Levy, C. M., & Ransdell, S. E. (1995). Is writing as difficult as it seems? Memory and Cognition, 23(6), 767-779.
31. Levy, C. M., & Ransdell, S. E. (2001). Writing with concurrent memory loads. In T. Olive & C. M. Levy (Eds.), Contemporary tools and techniques for studying writing (pp. 9-29). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
32. Lumbelli, L., Paoletti, G., & Frausin, T. (1999). Improving the ability to detect comprehension problems: From revising to writing. Learning and Instruction, 9, 143-166.
33. McCutchen, D. (1996). A capacity theory of writing: Working memory in composition. Educational Psychology Review, 8(3), 299-325.
34. McCutchen, D., Francis, M., & Kerr, S. (1997). Revising for meaning: Effects of knowledge and strategy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 667-676.
35. Olive, T., & Kellogg, R. T. (2002). Concurrent activation of high- and low-level production processes in written composition. Memory and Cognition, 30(4), 594-600.
36. Olive, T., & Piolat, A. (2005). La me moire de travail dans la production de textes [Working memory in text writing]. Psychologie Française, 50(3), 373-390.
37. Olive, T., Kellogg, R. T., & Piolat, A. (2002). The triple-task technique for studying the process of writing. In T. Olive & C. M. Levy (Eds.), Contemporary tools and techniques for studying writing (pp. 31-59). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
38. Piolat, A. (1998). Evaluation and assessment of written texts. In C. Clapham (Ed.), The encyclopedia of language and education: Vol. 7. Language testing and assessment (pp. 189-198). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
39. Piolat, A., Kellogg, R. T., & Farioli, F. (2001). The triple task technique for studying writing processes: On which task is attention focused? Current Psychology Letters: Brain. Behavior and Cognition, 4, 67-83.
40. Piolat, A., & Olive, T. (2000). Comment étudier le coût et le déroulement de la rédaction de textes? La méthode de la triple tâche: Un bilan me thodologique [How to study the cost and the unfolding of writing? Theoretical constraints and research methods]. L'Année Psychologique, 100, 465-502.
41. Piolat, A., Olive, T., & Kellogg, R. T. (2005). Cognitive effort during note taking. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(3), 291-312.
42. Piolat, A., Olive, T., Roussey, J.-Y., Thunin, O., & Ziegler, J. C. (1999). SCRIPTKELL: A tool for measuring cognitive effort and time processing in writing and other complex cognitive activities. Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 31(1), 113-121.
43. Piolat, A., Roussey, J.-Y., Olive, T., & Amada, M. (2004). Processing time and cognitive effort in revision: effects of error type and of working memory capacity. In L. Allal, L. Chanquoy, & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision: Cognitive and Instructional Processes (pp. 21-38). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
44. Ransdell, S., Levy, C.M., & Kellogg, R. T. (2002). The structure of writing processes as revealed by secondary task demands. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 2(2), 141-163.
45. Roussey, J.-Y. (1999). Le contrôle de la rédaction de textes. Perspective cognitive. [Monitoring text writing: A cognitive perspective] (Xeroxed document). Synthèse d'Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches, Université de Provence, Aix-en-Provence, France.
46. Roussey, J.-Y., & Piolat, A. (2005). La révision du texte: une activité de contrôle et de réflexion [Text revising: Monitoring and control]. Psychologie Française, 50(3), 351-372.
47. Torrance, M., & Jeffery, G. (Eds.).(1999). The cognitive demands of writing: Processing capacity and working memory effects in text production. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
48. Turley-Ames, K. J., & Whitfield, M. M. (2003). Strategy training and working memory task performance. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 446-468.
49. Wallace, D., Hayes, J., Hatch, J., Miller, W., Moser, G., & Silk, C. (1996). Better revision in eight minutes? Prompting first-year college writers to revise globally. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 682-687.