Cognitive Processes in Discourse Comprehension: Passive Processes, Reader-Initiated Processes, and Evolving Mental Representations

Discourse Processes

Volumn 54, Issue 5-6, 2017, Pages 360-372

  van den Broek, Paul ^a   Helder, Anne ^b  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85017411609     PISSN: 0163853X     EISSN: 15326950     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2017.1306677     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P., & Paris, S. (2008). Skills and strategies:Their differences, their relationships, and why it matters. In K., Mokhtari & R., Sheorey (Eds.), Reading strategies of first- and second-language learners:See how they read (pp. 11–24). Norwood, MA:Christopher Gordon.
2. Albrecht, J. E., & O’Brien, E. J., (1993). Updating a mental model:Maintaining both local and global coherence. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1061–1070.
3. Anderson, J. R., (1983). A spreading activation theory of memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 261–295.
4. Best, R. M., Rowe, M., Ozuru, Y., & McNamara, D. S., (2005). Deep‐level comprehension of science texts:The role of the reader and the text. Topics in Language Disorders, 25, 65–83.
5. Black, J. B., & Bower, G. H., (1980). Story understanding as problem-solving. Poetics, 9, 223–250.
6. Bråten, I., Britt, M. A., Strømsø, H. I., & Rouet, J. F., (2011). The role of epistemic beliefs in the comprehension of multiple expository texts:Toward an integrated model. Educational Psychologist, 46, 48–70.
7. Duke, N. K., & Pearson, P. (2002). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In A. E., Farstrup & S. J., Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 205–242). Newark, DE:International Reading Association.
8. Fisher, D., & Frey, N., (2012). Close reading in elementary schools. The Reading Teacher, 66, 179–188.
9. Gerrig, R. J., & O’Brien, E. J., (2005). The scope of memory-based processing. Discourse Processes, 39, 225–242.
10. Goldman, S. R., McCarthy, K. S., & Burkett, C., (2015). Interpretive inferences in literature. In E. J., O’Brien, A. E., Cook, & R. F., Lorch (Eds.), Inferences during reading (pp. 386–415). Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
11. Goldman, S. R., & Varma, S., (1995). CAPping the construction-integration model of discourse comprehension. In C. A., Weaver, S., Mannes, & C. R., Fletcher (Eds.), Discourse comprehension:Essays in honor of Walter Kintsch (pp. 337–358). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
12. Graesser, A. C., & Clark, L. F., (1985). Structures and procedures of implicit knowledge. Norwood, NJ:Ablex
13. Graesser, A., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T., (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371–395.
14. Helder, A., Stafura, J. Z., Calloway, R., van den Broek, P., & Perfetti, C. A., (2015, July). Centrality effects on word-to-text-integration during reading:An ERP study. Presentation at the annual meeting of the Society for Text and Discourse, Minneapolis, MN.
15. Helder, A., Van Leijenhorst, L., & van den Broek, P., (2016). Coherence monitoring by good and poor comprehenders in elementary school:Comparing offline and online measures. Learning and Individual Differences, 48, 17–23.
16. Isberner, M.-B., & Richter, T., (2014). Comprehension and validation:Separable stages of information processing? A case for epistemic monitoring in language comprehension. In D. N., Rapp & J., Braasch (Eds.), Processing inaccurate information:Theoretical and applied perspectives from cognitive science and the educational sciences. (pp. 245–276). Boston, MA:MIT Press.
17. Kintsch, W., (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension:A construction- integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163–182.
18. Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. A., (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363.
19. Kim, O., Kendeou, P., van den Broek, P., White, M.J., & Kremer, K., (2008). Cat, rat, and Rugrats:Narrative comprehension in young children with Down syndrome. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 20, 337–351.
20. LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J., (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information process in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323.
21. 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.
22. Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P., & Laham, D., (1998). An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 259–284.
23. 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.
24. Long, D. L., & Lea, R. B., (2005). Have we been searching for meaning in all the wrong places? Defining the “search after meaning” principle in comprehension. Discourse Processes, 39, 279–298.
25. Lorch, R. F., & Lorch, E. P., (1985). Topic structure representation and text recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 137–148.
26. Lorch, R. F., Lorch, E. P., & Matthews, P. D., (1985). On-line processing of the topic structure of a text. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 350–362.
27. Lorch, R. F., Lorch, E. P., & Mogan, A. M., (1987). Effects of reading task on on-line processing of a text’s topic structure. Discourse Processes, 10, 63–80.
28. Lynch, J. S., van den Broek, P., Kremer, K. E., Kendeou, P., White, M. J., & Lorch, E. P., (2008). The development of narrative comprehension and its relation to other early reading skills. Reading Psychology, 29, 327–365.
29. McCrudden, M., T., Magliano, J.P., & Schraw, G., (2011). Toward an integrated view of relevance in text comprehension. In M.T., McCrudden, J.P., Magliano, & G., Schraw (Eds), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 395–414). Charlotte, NC:Information Age.
30. McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R., (1992). Inference during reading. Psychological Review, 99, 440–466.
31. McNamara, D. S., (2004). SERT:Self-explanation reading training. Discourse Processes, 38, 1–30.
32. McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J., (2009). Toward a comprehensive model of comprehension. In B., Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 297–384). New York, NY:Elsevier.
33. Meyer, B. J., & Freedle, R. O., (1984). Effects of discourse type on recall. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 121–143.
34. Miller, A. C., & Keenan, J. M., (2009). How word decoding skill impacts text memory:The centrality deficit and how domain knowledge can compensate. Annals of Dyslexia, 59, 99–113.
35. Myers, J. L., & O’Brien, E. J., (1998). Accessing the discourse representation during reading.Discourse Processes, 26, 131–157.
36. 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.
37. O’Brien, E. J., & Cook, A. E., (2016). Coherence threshold and the continuity of processing:The RI-Val model of comprehension. Discourse Processes 53, 326–338.
38. O’Brien, E. J., Cook, A. E., & Lorch, R. F., (Eds). (2015). Inferences during reading. Cambridge UK:Cambridge University Press.
39. O’Brien, E. J., & Myers, J. L., (1987). The role of causal connections in the retrieval of text. Memory & Cognition, 15, 419–427.
40. O’Brien, E. J., & Myers, J. L., (1999). Text comprehension:A view from the bottom-up. In S. R., Goldman, A. C., Graesser, & P., van den Broek (Eds.), Narrative comprehension, causality, and coherence:Essays in honor of Tom Trabasso (pp. 35–53). Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
41. O’Brien, E. J., Rizzella, M. L., Albrecht, J. E., & Halleran, J. G. (1998). Updating a situation model:A memory-based text processing view. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1200–1210.
42. Omanson, R. C., (1982). An analysis of narratives:Identifying central, supportive, and distracting content. Discourse Processes, 5, 195–224.
43. Pearson, P. D., Roehler, L., Dole, J., & Duffy, G. (1992). Developing expertise in reading comprehension. In S. J., Samuels & A. E., Farstrup (Eds.), What research says to the teacher (pp. 145–199). Newark DE:International Reading Association.
44. Perfetti, C., & Stafura, J., (2015). Comprehending implicit meanings in text without making inferences. In E. J., O’Brien, A., Cook, & R. F., Lorch (Eds.), Inferences during reading (pp. 1–18). Cambridge UK:Cambridge University Press.
45. Pressley, M., & Wharton-McDonald, R., (1997). Skilled comprehension and its development through instruction. School Psychology Review, 26, 448–467
46. Rapp, D. N., & van den Broek, P., (2005). Dynamic text comprehension:An integrative view of reading. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 276–279.
47. Ratcliff, R., & McKoon, G., (1988). A retrieval theory of priming in memory. Psychological Review, 95, 385–408.
48. Rouet, J.-F., (2006). The skills of document use:From text comprehension to Web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
49. Seifert, C. M., Abelson, R. P., McKoon, G. (1986). The role of thematic knowledge structures in reminding. In J. A., Galambos, R. P., Abelson, & J. B., Black (Eds), Knowledge structures (pp. 185–210). Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
50. Singer, M., (2013). Validation in reading comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 361–366.
51. Singer, M., Graesser, A., & Trabasso, T., (1994). Minimal or global inference during reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 421–441.
52. Trabasso, T., Secco, T., & van den Broek, P. W., (1984). Causal cohesion and story coherence. In H., Mandl, N. L., Stein, & T., Trabasso (Eds.), Learning and comprehension of text (pp. 83–111). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
53. Trabasso, T., & van den Broek, P. W., (1985). Causal thinking and the representation of narrative events. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 612–630.
54. Trabasso, T., van den Broek, P., & Suh, S. Y., (1989). Logical necessity and transitivity of causal relations in stories. Discourse Processes, 12, 1–25.
55. Tzeng, Y., van den Broek, P., Kendeou, P., & Lee, C., (2005). The computational implementation of the Landscape Model:Modeling inferential processes and memory representations of text comprehension. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 37, 277–286.
56. van den Broek, P., (1988). The effects of causal relations and hierarchical position on the importance of story statements. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 1–22.
57. van den Broek, P., (1994). Comprehension and memory of narrative texts:Inferences and coherence. In M. A., Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of Psycholinguistics (pp. 539–588):New York, NY:Academic Press.
58. van den Broek, P., (2010). Using texts in science education:Cognitive processes and knowledge representation. Science, 328(5977), 453–456. doi:10.1126/science.1182594
59. van den Broek, P., Beker, K., & Oudega, M., (2015). Inference generation in text comprehension:Automatic and strategic processes in the construction of a mental representation. In E. J., O’Brien, A. E., Cook, & R. F., Lorch (Eds.), Inferences during reading (pp. 94–121). Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
60. van den Broek, P., Bohn-Gettler, C., Kendeou, P., Carlson, S., & White, M. J., (2011). When a reader meets a text:The role of standards of coherence in reading comprehension. In M. T., McCrudden, J. P., Magliano, & G., Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 123–139). Greenwich, CT:Information Age.
61. van den Broek, P., & Gustafson, M., (1999). Comprehension and memory for texts:Three generations of research. In S. R., Goldman, A. C., Graesser, & P., van den Broek (Eds.), Narrative comprehension, causality, and coherence:Essays in honor of Tom Trabasso (pp. 15–34). Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
62. van den Broek, P. W., Helder, A., & Van Leijenhorst, L., (2013). Sensitivity to structural centrality:Developmental and individual differences in reading comprehension skills. In M. A., Britt, S. R., Goldman, & J-F, Rouet (Eds), Reading:From words to multiple texts (pp. 132–146). New York:Routledge, Taylor & Francis.
63. 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.
64. van den Broek, P., Rapp, D. N., & Kendeou, P., (2005). Integrating memory-based and constructionist processes in accounts of reading comprehension. Discourse Processes, 39, 299–316.
65. 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). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
66. van den Broek, P., & Trabasso, T., (1986). Causal networks versus goal hierarchies in summarizing text. Discourse Processes, 9, 1–15.
67. van den Broek, P., Young, M., Tzeng, Y., & Linderholm, T., (1999). The landscape model of reading. In H., van Oostendorp & S. R., Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 71–98). Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
68. Wassenburg, S. I., Beker, K., van den Broek, P., & Van der Schoot, M., (2015). Children’s comprehension monitoring of multiple situational dimensions of a narrative. Reading and Writing:An Interdisciplinary Journal, 28, 1203–1232.
69. Wolman, C., van den Broek, P., & Lorch, R. F., (1997). Effects of causal structure on immediate and delayed story recall by children with mild mental retardation, children with learning disabilities, and children without disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 30, 439–455.
70. Yeari, M., Oudega, M., & van den Broek, P., (2016). The effect of text highlighting on online processing, memory, and comprehension of central and peripheral information:Evidence from eye-movements. Journal of Research in Reading. doi:10.1111/1467-9817.12072
71. Yeari, M., & van den Broek, P., (2015). The role of textual semantic constraints in knowledge-based inference generation during reading comprehension:A computational approach. Memory, 23, 1193–1214.
72. Yeari, M., & van den Broek, P., (2016). A computational modeling of semantic knowledge in reading comprehension:Integrating the landscape model with latent semantic analysis. Behavior Research Method, 48, 880–896.
73. Yeari, M., van den Broek, P., & Oudega, M., (2015). Processing and memory of central versus peripheral information as a function of reading goals:Evidence from eye-movements. Reading and Writing, 28, 1071–1097.
74. Zabrucky, K., & Ratner, H. H., (1992). Effects of passage type on comprehension monitoring and recall in good and poor readers. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24, 373–391.
75. 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.