Discourse processing-examining our everyday language experiences

Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science

Volumn 1, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 371-381

  Sparks, Jesse R ^a   Rapp, David N ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79957612774     PISSN: 19395078     EISSN: 19395086     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/wcs.11     Document Type: Review

References (78)

1. Graesser AC, Gernsbacher MA, Goldman SR, eds. Handbook of Discourse Processes. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2003.
2. Murakami H. Kafka on the Shore. New York: Vintage International; 2005.
3. Haberlandt K. Methods in reading research. In: Gernsbacher MA, ed. Handbook of Psycholinguistics. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 1994, 1-31.
4. Rayner K. Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychol Bull 1998, 124:372-422.
5. Magliano JP, Graesser AC. A three-pronged method for studying inference generation in literary text. Poetics 1991, 20:193-232.
6. Zwaan RA, Singer M. Text comprehension. In: Graesser AC, Gernsbacher, MA, Goldman SR, eds. Handbook of Discourse Processes. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2003, 83-121.
7. Gernsbacher MA. Language Comprehension as Structure Building. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1990.
8. Givón T. The grammar of referential coherence as mental processing instructions. Linguistics 1992, 30:5-55.
9. Sanders TJM, Noordman LGM. The role of coherence relations and their linguistic markers in text processing. Discourse Process 2000, 29:37-60.
10. Dell GS, McKoon G, Ratcliff R. The activation of antecedent information during the processing of anaphoric reference in reading. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav 1983, 22:121-132.
11. Klin CM, Weingartner KM, Guzmán AE, Levine WH. Readers' sensitivity to linguistic cues in narrative: how salience influences anaphor resolution. Mem Cognit 2004, 32:511-522.
12. Hyona J, Lorch RF. Effects of topic headings on text processing: evidence from adult readers' eye fixation patterns. Learn Inst 2004, 14:131-152.
13. Bransford JD, Johnson MK. Contextual prerequisites for understanding: some investigations of comprehension and recall. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav 1972, 11:717-726.
14. Zwaan RA, LangstonMC, Graesser AC. The construction of situation models in narrative comprehension: an event-indexing model. Psychol Sci 1995, 6:292-297.
15. Zwaan RA, Radvansky GA. Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychol Bull 1998, 123:162-185.
16. Zwaan RA. Processing narrative time shifts. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cognit 1996, 22:1196-1207.
17. Glenberg AM, Meyer M, Lindem K. Mental models contribute to foregrounding during text comprehension. J MemLang 1987, 26:69-83.
18. Bower GH, Morrow DG. Mental models in narrative comprehension. Science 1990, 247:44-48.
19. Rapp DN, Taylor HA. Interactive dimensions in the construction of mental representations for text. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cognit 2004, 30:988-1001.
20. Mandler J, Johnson N. Remembrance of things parsed: story structure and recall. Cogn Psychol 1977, 9:111-151.
21. Goldman SR, Bisanz GL. Toward functional analysis of scientific genres: implications for understanding and learning processes. In: Otero J, Leon JA, Graesser AC, eds. The Psychology of Science Text Comprehension. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2002, 19-50.
22. Wolfe MBW. Memory for narrative and expository text: independent influences of semantic associations and text organization. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cognit 2005, 31:359-364.
23. Zwaan RA. Effect of genre expectations on text comprehension. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cognit 1994, 20:920-933.
24. Just MA, Carpenter PA. A capacity theory of comprehension: individual differences in working memory. Psychol Rev 1992, 99:122-149.
25. Long DL, Lea RB. Have we been searching for meaning in all the wrong places? Defining the "search after meaning" principle in comprehension. Discourse Process 2005, 39:279-298.
26. van den Broek P, Rapp DN, Kendeou P. Integrating memory-based and constructionist processes in accounts of reading comprehension. Discourse Process 2005, 39:299-316.
27. Alvermann DE, Fitzgerald J, Simpson M. Teaching and learning in reading. In: Alexander, PA, Winne PH, eds. Handbook of Educational Psychology. 2nd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2006, 427-455.
28. van den Broek P, Lorch RF Jr, Linderholm T, Gustafson M. The effects of readers' goals on inference generation and memory for texts. Mem Cognit 2001, 29:1081-1087.
29. Linderholm T, van den Broek P. The effects of reading purpose and working memory capacity on the processing of expository text. J Educ Psychol 2002, 94:778-784.
30. KintschW. Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1998.
31. van Dijk TA, Kintsch W. Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York: Academic Press; 1983.
32. Bransford JD, Barclay JR, Franks JJ. Sentence memory: a constructive versus interpretive approach. Cogn Psychol 1972, 3:193-209.
33. Kintsch W, van Dijk TA. Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychol Rev 1978, 85:363-394.
34. Kreuz RJ, Glucksberg S. How to be sarcastic: the echoic reminder theory of verbal irony. J Exp Psychol Gen 1989, 118:374-386.
35. Singer M. Discourse inference processes. In: Gernsbacher MA, ed. Handbook of Psycholinguistics. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 1994, 479-515.
36. Pressley M, Hilden K. Teaching reading comprehension. In:McKeough A, Phillips LM, Timmons V, Lupart JL, eds. Understanding literacy development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2005, 49-64.
37. Idol L, Croll VJ. Story-mapping training as a means of improving reading comprehension. Learn Disabil Q 1987, 10:214-222.
38. Rapp DN, van den Broek P. Dynamic text comprehension: an integrative view of reading. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2005, 14:276-279.
39. Meyer DE, Schvaneveldt RW. Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. J Exp Psychol 1971, 90:227-234.
40. Gerrig RJ, McKoon G. The readiness is all: the functionality of memory-based text processing. Discourse Process 1998, 26:67-86.
41. Myers JL, O'Brien EJ. Accessing the discourse representation during reading. Discourse Process 1998, 26:131-157.
42. Lea RB, Rapp DN, Elfenbein A, Mitchel AD, Romine RS. Sweet silent thought: alliteration and resonance in poetry comprehension. Psychol Sci 2008, 19:706-716.
43. O'Brien EJ, Rizzella ML, Albrecht JE, Halleran JG. Updating a situation model: a memory-based text processing view. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cognit 1998, 24:1200-1210.
44. Collins AM, Loftus EF. A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychol Rev 1975, 82:407-428.
45. Albrecht JE, O'Brien EJ. Updating a mental model: maintaining both local and global coherence. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cognit 1993, 19:1061-1069.
46. Graesser AC, Singer M, Trabasso T. Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychol Rev 1994, 101:371-395.
47. Singer M, Halldorson M. Constructing and validating motive bridging inferences. Cognit Psychol 1996, 30:1-38.
48. Cook AE, Limber JE, O'Brien EJ. Situation-based context and the availability of predictive inferences. J Mem Lang 2001, 44:220-234.
49. McKoon G, Ratcliff R. Inference during reading. Psychol Rev 1992, 99:440-466.
50. Kintsch W. The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model. Psychol Rev 1988, 95:163-182.
51. van den Broek P, Young M, Tzeng Y, Linderholm T. The landscape model of reading. In: van Oostendorp H, Goldman SR, eds. The Construction of Mental Representations During Reading. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1999, 71-98.
52. Goldman S, Varma S. CAPping the construction integration model of discourse comprehension. In: Weaver CA, Mannes S, Fletcher CR, eds. Discourse Comprehension: Essays in Honor of Walter Kintsch. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1995, 337-358.
53. Zajonc RB.On the primacy of affect. Am Psychol 1984, 39:117-123.
54. Bryant GA, Fox Tree JE. Recognizing verbal irony in spontaneous speech. Metaphor Symb 2002, 17(2):99-117.
55. Gibbs RW Jr. Skating on thin ice: literal meaning and understanding idioms in conversation. Discourse Process 1986, 9(1):17-30.
56. Rapp DN, Gerrig RJ, Prentice DA. Readers' traitbased models of characters in narrative comprehension. J MemLang 2001, 45:737-750.
57. Rapp DN, Gerrig RJ. Readers' reality-driven and plot-driven analyses in narrative comprehension. Mem Cognit 2002, 30:779-788.
58. Rapp DN, Gerrig RJ. Predilections for narrative outcomes: the impact of story contexts and reader preferences. J MemLang 2006, 54(1):54-67.
59. Gerrig RJ. Experiencing Narrative Worlds. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1993.
60. Marsh EJ, Fazio LK. Learning errors from fiction: difficulties in reducing reliance on fictional stories. Mem Cognit 2006, 34:1140-1149.
61. Prentice DA, Gerrig RJ, Bailis DS. What readers bring to the processing of fictional texts. Psychon Bull Rev 1997, 4:416-420.
62. Wheeler SC, Green MC, Brock TC. Fictional narratives change beliefs: replications of Prentice, Gerrig, and Bailis (1997) with mixed corroboration. Psychon Bull Rev 1999, 6(1):136-141.
63. Marsh EJ, Meade ML, Roediger HL III. Learning facts from fiction. J Mem Lang 2003, 49:519-536.
64. Fazio LK, Marsh EJ. Slowing presentation speed increases illusions of knowledge. Psychon Bull Rev 2008, 15:180-185.
65. Green MC, Brock TC. The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. J Personal Soc Psychol 2000, 79:701-721.
66. Rapp DN. How do readers handle incorrect information during reading? Mem Cognit 2008, 36:688-701.
67. Johnson HM, Seifert CM. Sources of the continued influence effect: when misinformation in memory affects later inferences. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cognit 1994, 20:1420-1436.
68. Rapp DN, Kendeou P. Revising what readers know: updating text representations during narrative comprehension. Mem Cognit 2007, 35:2019-2032.
69. Guzzetti BJ, Snyder TE, Glass GV, Gamas WS. Promoting conceptual change in science: a comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Read ResQ1993, 28:117-159.
70. Rapp DN, van den Broek P, McMaster KL, Kendeou P, Espin CA. Higher-order comprehension processes in struggling readers: a perspective for research and intervention. Sci Stud Read 2007, 11:289-312.
71. Wolf MS, Davis TC, Shrank W, Rapp DN, Bass PF, et al. To err is human: patient misinterpretations of prescription drug label instructions. Patient Educ Couns 2007, 67:293-300.
72. McNamara DS, Kintsch E, Songer NB, Kintsch W. Are good texts always better? Text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognit Instr 1996, 14:1-43.
73. Brunyé TT, Taylor HA, Rapp DN, Spiro AB. Learning procedures: the role of working memory in multimedia learning experiences. Appl Cogn Psychol 2006, 20:917-940.
74. Graesser AC, Wiemer-Hastings K, Wiemer-Hastings P, Kreuz R, Tutoring Research Group University of Memphis. AutoTutor: a simulation of a human tutor. Cogn Syst Res 1999, 1(1):35-51.
75. Mayer RE. Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2001.
76. Gernsbacher MA, Givón T, eds. Coherence in Spontaneous Text. Philadelphia PA: John Benjamins; 1995.
77. Kendeou P, Rapp DN, van den Broek P. The influence of readers' prior knowledge on text comprehension and learning from text. In: Nata R, ed. Progress in Education Vol. 1. New York: Nova Science Publishers; 2004, 189-209.
78. Otero J, Leon JA, Graesser AC, eds. The Psychology of Science Text Comprehension. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2002.