The impact of semantic and causal relatedness and reading skill on standards of coherence

Discourse Processes

Volumn 47, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 421-446

  Todaro, Stacey ^a   Millis, Keith ^b   Dandotkar, Srikanth ^b  

^a ADRIAN COLLEGE   (United States)

^b NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954628246     PISSN: 0163853X     EISSN: 15326950     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01638530903253825     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Barton, S. B., & Sanford, A. J. (1993). A case study of anomaly detection: Shallow semantic processing and cohesion establishment. Memory and Cognition, 21, 477-487.
2. Boring, E. G. (1957). A history of experimental psychology(2nd ed.). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
3. Britton, B. K., & Gulgoz, S. (1991). Using Kintsch's computational model to improve instructional text: Effects of repairing inference calls on recall and cognitive structures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 329-345.
4. Brown, J. I., Fishco, V. V., & Hanna, G. (1993). Nelson-Denny Reading Test. Chicago: Riverside.
5. Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. V. (1999). Inference making ability and its relation to comprehension failure in young children. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 11, 489-503.
6. Cain, K., Oakhill, J. V., Barnes, M. A., & Bryant, P. E. (2001). Comprehension skill, inferencemaking ability, and their relation to knowledge. Memory & Cognition, 29, 850-859.
7. Ferstl, E. C. (2006). Text comprehension in middle aged adults: Is there anything wrong? Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 13, 62-85.
8. Ferstl, E. C., Guthke, T., & von Cramon, D. Y. (2002). Text comprehension after brain injury: Left prefrontal lesions affect inference processes. Neuropsychology, 16, 292-308.
9. 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 the coherence of conjoined sentences. In R. F. Lorch & E. J. O'Brien (Eds.), Sources of coherence in reading (pp. 203-218). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
10. Foltz, P. W., Kintsch, W., & Landauer, T. K. (1998). The measurement of textual coherence with latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 285-307.
11. Gernsbacher, M. A. (1985). Surface information loss in comprehension. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 324-363.
12. Gernsbacher, M. A. (1990). Language comprehensionas structure building. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
13. Gernsbacher, M. A., & Faust, M. E. (1991). The mechanism of suppression: A component of general comprehension skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 245-262.
14. Giora, R. (1985). Notes toward a theory of text coherence. Poetics Today, 6, 699-715.
15. Graesser, A. C. (1981). Prose comprehension beyond the world. New York: Springer-Verlag.
16. 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 & C. E. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 82-98). New York: Guilford.
17. Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M., & Cai, Z. (2004). Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text cohesion and language. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 193-202.
18. Graesser, A. C., Millis, K. K., & Zwaan, R. A. (1997). Discourse comprehension. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 163-189.
19. Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371-395.
20. Hannon, B., & Daneman, M. (2004). Shallow semantic processing of text: An individual-differences account. Discourse Processes, 37, 187-204.
21. Keenan, J. M., Baillet, S. D., & Brown, P. (1984). The effects of causal cohesion on comprehension and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 115-126.
22. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.
23. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
24. Kintsch, W., Welsch, D., Schmalhofer, F., & Zimny, S. (1990). Sentence memory: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 133-159.
25. Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363-394.
26. Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997) A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of the acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 211-240.
27. Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P., & Laham, D. (1998). An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 259-284.
28. Lau, K., & Chan, D. W. (2003). Reading strategy use and motivation among Chinese good and poor reader in Hong Kong. Journal of Research in Reading, 26, 177-190.
29. Long, D. L., Oppy, B. J., & Seely, M. R. (1997). Individual differences in readers' sentence- and text-level representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 129-145.
30. Magliano, J. P., & Millis, K. K. (2003). Assessing reading skill with a think-aloud procedure and latent semantic analysis. Cognition and Instruction, 21, 251-283.
31. Magliano, J. P., Trabasso, T., & Graesser, A. C. (1999). Strategic processes during comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 615-629.
32. Magliano, J. P., Zwaan, R. A., & Graesser, A. C. (1999). The role of situational continuity in narrative understanding. In S. R. Goldman & H. van Oostendorp (Eds.), The construction of mental representation during reading (pp. 219-245). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
33. Myers, J. L. (1990). Causal relatedness and text comprehension. In D. A. Balota, G. B. Flores d' Arcais, & K. Rayner (Eds.), Comprehension processes in reading (pp. 361-375). Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
34. Oakhill, J. (1994). Individual differences in children's text comprehension. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 821-848). New York: Academic.
35. Oakhill, J., Cain, K., & Yuill, N. (1998). Individual differences in children's comprehension skill: Towards and integrated model. In C. Hulme & M. Joshi (Eds.), Reading and spelling: Development and disorder (pp. 82-104). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
36. Tapiero, I. (2007). Situation models and levels of coherence: Toward a definition of comprehension. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
37. Trabasso, T., & Magliano, J. P. (1996). Conscious understanding during comprehension. Discourse Processes, 21, 255-287.
38. Trabasso, T., & Sperry, L. L. (1985). Causal relatedness and importance of story events. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 595-611.
39. Trabasso, T., & Suh, S. (1993). Understandingtext: Achieving explanatorycoherencethrough on-line inferences and mental operations in working memory. Discourse Processes, 16, 3-34.
40. Trabasso, T., Suh, S., & Payton, P. (1992). Explanatory coherence in understanding and talking about events. In M. A. Gernsbacher & T. Givon (Eds.), Coherence in spontaneous text: Topical studies in language (Vol. 31, pp. 189-214). Philadelphia: Benjamins.
41. van den Broek, P. (1990). Causal inferences in the comprehension of narrative texts. In A. C. Graesser & G. H. Bower (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Inference generation in text comprehension (Vol. 25, pp. 175-194). San Diego: Academic.
42. van den Broek, P. (1994). Comprehension and memory of narrative texts: Inferences and coherence. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics(pp. 539-588). New York: Academic.
43. van den Broek, P., Fletcher, C. R., & Risden, K. (1993). Investigations of inferential processes in reading: A theoretical and methodological integration. Discourse Processes, 16, 169-180.
44. van den Broek, P., & Lorch, R. F., Jr. (1993). Network representations of causal relations in memory for narrative texts: Evidence from primed recognition. Discourse Processes, 16, 75-98.
45. van den Broek, P., Lorch, R. F., Linderholm, T., & Gustafson, M. (2001). The effects of readers' goals on inference generation and memory for texts. Memory & Cognition, 29, 1081-1087.
46. van den Broek, P., Risden, K., & Husebye-Hartmann, E. (1995). The role of readers' standards for coherence in the generation of inferences during reading. In R. F. Lorch, Jr. & E. J. O'Brien (Eds.), Sources of coherence in reading (pp. 353-373). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
47. van den Broek, P., Rohleder, L., & Narvaez, D. (1996). Causal inferences in the comprehension of literary texts. In R. Kreuz & M. S. MacNealy (Eds.), Empirical approaches to discourse: Perspectives from the third IGEL conference (pp. 179-200). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
48. van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic.
49. Wolfe, M. B., Magliano, J. P., & Larsen, B. (2005). Causal and semantic relatedness in discourse understanding and representation. Discourse Processes, 39, 165-187.
50. Zwaan, R. A., Langston, M. C., & Graesser, A. C. (1995). The construction of situation models in narrative comprehension: An event-indexing model. Psychological Science, 6, 292-297.
51. Zwaan, R. A., Magliano, J. P., & Graesser, A. C. (1995). Dimensions of situation model construction in narrative comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 386-397.
52. Zwaan, R. A., & Singer, M. (2003). Text comprehension. In A. C. Graesser, M. A. Gernsbacher, & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), Handbook of discourse processes (pp. 83-121). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.