The effect of diagrams on online reading processes and memory

Discourse Processes

Volumn 48, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 69-92

  Mccrudden, Matthew T ^a   Magliano, Joseph P ^b   Schraw, Gregory ^c  

^a VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON   (New Zealand)

^b NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79951825435     PISSN: 0163853X     EISSN: 15326950     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01638531003694561     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Azevedo, R., & Cromley, J. G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students' learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 523-535.
2. Carney, R. N., & Levin, J. R. (2002). Pictorial illustrations still improve students' learning from text. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 5-26.
3. Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6, 284-290.
4. Cote, N., Goldman, S. R., & Saul, E. U. (1998). Students making sense of informational text: Relations between processing and representation. Discourse Processes, 25, 1-53.
5. Cromley, J. G., Snyder-Hogan, L. E., & Luciw-Dubas, U. A. (2010). Cognitive activities in complex science text and diagrams. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 1, 59-74.
6. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. Glenberg, A., & Langston, W. (1992). Comprehension of illustrated text: Pictures help to build mental models. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 129-151.
8. Graesser, A. C., & Olde, B. A. (2003). How does one know whether a person understands a device? The quality of the questions the person asks when the device breaks down. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 524-536.
9. Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371-395.
10. Grant, E. R., & Spivey, M. J. (2003). Eye movements and problem solving: Guiding attention guides thought. Psychological Science, 14, 462-466.
11. Kaakinen, J. K., & Hyönä, J. (2005). Perspective effects on expository text comprehension: Evidence from think-aloud protocols, eye-tracking, and recall. Discourse Processes, 40, 239-257.
12. Kaakinen, J. K., & Hyönä, J. (2008). Perspective-driven text comprehension. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 319-344.
13. Kendeou, P., & van den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1567-1577.
14. Kiewra, K. A., Kauffman, D. F., Robinson, D. H., Dubois, N. F., & Staley, R. K. (1999). Supplementing floundering text with adjunct displays. Instructional Science, 27, 373-401.
15. Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65-100.
16. Linderholm, T., & van den Broek, P. (2002). The effects of reading purpose and working memory capacity on the processing of expository text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 778-784.
17. Magliano, J. P., & Graesser, A. C. (1991). A three-prongedmethod for studying inference generation in literary text. Poetics, 20, 193-232.
18. Magliano, J. P., & Millis, K. K. (2003). Assessing reading skill with a think-aloud procedure. Cognition and Instruction, 21, 251-283.
19. Magliano, J. P., Trabasso, T., & Graesser, A. C. (1999). Strategic processes during comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 615-629.
20. Mautone, P. D., & Mayer, R. E. (2007). Cognitive aids for guiding graph comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 640-652.
21. Mayer, R. E., Mathias, A., & Wetzell, K. (2002). Fostering understanding of multimedia messages through pre-training: Evidence for a two-stage theory of mental model construction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 147-154.
22. Mayer, R. E., Mautone, P., & Prothero, W. (2002). Pictorial aids for learning by doing in a multimedia geology simulation game. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 171-185.
23. McCrudden, M. T., Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2009). The use of adjunct displays to facilitate comprehension of causal relationships in expository text. Instructional Science, 37, 65-86.
24. McCrudden, M. T., Schraw, G., Lehman, S., & Poliquin, A. (2007). The effect of causal diagrams on text learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 367-388.
25. Millis, K. K., & King, A. (2001). Rereading strategically: The influence of comprehension ability and prior reading on the memory for expository text. Reading Psychology, 22, 41-65.
26. Muñoz, B. D., Magliano, J. P., & Millis, K. K. (2007, April). Differences in reading strategies and comprehension across text genres. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
27. Myers, J., & O'Brien, E. (1998). Accessing the discourse representation during reading. Discourse Processes, 26, 131-157.
28. Narvaez, D., van den Broek, P., & Ruiz, A. B. (1999). The influence of reading purpose on inference generation and comprehension in reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 488-496.
29. Nesbitt, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231-259.
30. Rapp, D. N., & Kendeou, P. (2007). Revising what readers know: Updating text representations during narrative comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 35(8), 2019-2032.
31. Rapp, D., & Mensink, M. (2011, in press). Focusing effects from online and offline reading tasks. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
32. Robinson, D. H. (2002). Spatial text adjuncts and learning: An introduction to the special issue. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 307-309.
33. Robinson, D. H., & Kiewra, K. A. (1995). Visual argument: Graphic organizers are superior to outlines in improving learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 455-467.
34. Robinson, D. H., & Schraw, G. (1994). Computational efficiency through visual argument: Do graphic organizers communicate relations in text too effectively? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 399-415.
35. Trabasso, T., & Magliano, J. P. (1996). Conscious understanding during comprehension. Discourse Processes, 21, 255-287.
36. Van den Broek, P., Lorch, R. F., Jr., Linderholm, T., & Gustafson, M. (2001). The effects of readers' goals on inference generation and memory for texts. Memory & Cognition, 29, 1081-1087.
37. Vekiri, I. (2002).What is the value of graphical displays in learning? Educational Psychology Review, 14, 261-312.
38. Winn, W. (1991). Learning from maps and diagrams. Educational Psychology Review, 3, 211-247.