Discourse Processing Strategies and Reading
Mots-clés :
reading comprehension, discourse processing, recall strategies, schema theoryRésumé
La recherche effectuée sur l’organisation d’un texte a démontré que la réaction à la lecture d’un texte dépend du nombre et de la complexité d’unités d’idées ou propositions et que la capacité qu’ont les enfants de se souvenir de ce qu’ils ont lu dépend de l’importance relative des unités d’idées. Dans cet article on examine les ramifications de ces propositions, en particulier celle qui dit que la lecture dépend de la capacité du lecteur à se souvenir du texte. Une recherche antérieure suggérait que le genre de rappel dont se sert le lecteur aiderait à comprendre la manière dont il obtient des connaissances à partir du texte imprimé. L’étude présentée ici soutient cette théorie. Les lecteurs qui utilisent des stratégies de rappel provoquées par le texte retirent plus de compréhension du texte. D’autre part, plus le lecteur recueille des informations erronées dans le texte, moins il le comprend. Le rappel de détails spécifiques dans le texte n’a guère de signification alors que le résultat de rappel de détails externes au texte ou expérientiels par rapport au texte est négligeable. On a prouvé que le modèle de rappel était un excellent moyen de prédire la compréhension du texte, ce qui suggère que l’habileté à se rappeler est une importante stratégie d’encodage dont se sert le lecteur pour comprendre le texte.
Références
Beebe, M. J. (1976). Case studies of grade level effects on children's miscues and reading comprehension. Canadian Journal of Education, 1(2), 51-62.
Blalock, H. M. (1963). Correlated independent variables: The problem of multicollinearity. Social Forces, 42, 233-237.
Blalock, H. M. (1964). Causal inferences in non-experimental research. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
Bower, G. H. (1976). Experiments on story understanding and recall. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 28, 511-534.
Bulcock,J. W., & Lee, W. F. (1983). Normalization ridge regression in practice. Sociological Methods and Research, 1(3), 259-303.
Bulcock, J. W., Lee, W. F., & Luk, W. S. (1981). The theory of normalization ridge regression. Washington, DC: National Institute of Education, Educational Resources Information Center. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED.178 581).
Christ, C. F. (1966). Econometric models and methods. New York: John Wiley.
Crothers, E.J. (1972). Memory structure and the recall of discourse. In R. Freedle &J. B. Carroll (Eds.), Language comprehension and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 247-284). Washington, DC: Winston.
Drum, P. A. (1978). Prose recall responses and categories for scoring. In P. D. Pearson & J. Hanson (Eds.), Disciplined inquiry in process and practice. (Twenty-seventh Yearbook of The National Reading Conference) (pp. 88-92). Clemsen, SC: The National Reading Conference.
Fagan, W. J. (1978). A comparison of the oral language of children age nine, ten and eleven (Research report, Canada Council grant 675-0563). Edmonton: Department of Ele- mentary Education, University of Alberta.
Farrar, D. W., & Glauber, R. R. (1967). Multicollinearity in regression analysis: the problem revisited. Review of Economics and Statistics, 49, 92-107.
Fiefel, H., & Lorge, I. (1950). Qualitative differences in the vocabulary responses of children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 4 , 1-18.
Fodor,J. A., Bever, T. C., & Garrett, M. F. (1974). The psychology of language: An introduction to psycholinguistics and generative grammar. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fredericksen, C. H. (1975a). Acquisition of semantic information from discourse: Effects of repeated exposures. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 158-169.
Fredericksen, C. H. (1975b). Effects of context-induced processing operations on semantic information acquired from discourse. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 139-166.
Fredericksen, C. H. (1977). Semantic processing units in understanding text. In R. O. Freedle (Ed.), Discourse production and comprehension (Vol. i) (pp. 55-87). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
Goodman, Y. M., & Burke, C. L. (1972). Reading miscue inventory. New York: Macmillan.
Guthrie, J. T. (1973). Reading comprehension and syntactic responses in good and poor readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 294-299.
Guthrie,J. T., & Siefert, M. (n.d.) Maze Task: Experimental version. Unpublished manuscript.
Hoerl, A. E., Kennard, R. W., & Baldwin, K. F. (1975). Ridge regression: Some simulation. Communication in Statistics, 4(2), 105-123.
Johnson, N. S., & Mandler, J. M. (1980). A tale of two structures: Underlying and surface forms in stories. Poetics, 9, 51-86.
Kasarda, J. D., & Shih, W. F. (1977). Optimal bias in ridge regression approaches to multicollinearity. Sociological Methods and Research, 5, 461-470.
King, E. M., & Hieronymus, A. N. (1974). Canadian tests of basic skills. Toronto: Thomas Nelson.
King, E. M., & Hieronymus, A. N. (Eds.). (1975). Canadian tests of basic skills: Manualfor administrators, supervisors and counsellors. Toronto: Thomas Nelson.
Kintsch, W. (1974). The representation of meaning in memory. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363-394.
Kish, L. (1975). Representation, randomization and control. In H. M. Blalock Jr., Mathematical models and international perspectives on mathematical sociology. New York: Academic Press.
Lawless, J. F., & Wang, P. (1976). A simulation study of ridge and other regression estimators. Communications in statistics, A5, 4, 306-323.
Lee, W. F., Bulcock, J. W., & Luk, W. S. (1984). The R2 ridge trace in 2SLS regression estimation. Sociological Methods and Research, 13, 219-249.
Mandler, J. (1979). Categorial and schematic organization in memory. In C. R. Puff (Ed.), Memory organization and structure. New York: Academic Press.
Mandler,J. M., & Johnson, N. S. (1977). Remembrance of things past: Story structure and recall. Cognitive Psychology, 9, I 1 1-151.
Meyer, B. (1974). The organization of prose and its effect on recall (Report No. 1, Reading and Learning Series). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, Department of Education.
Minsky, M. (1975). A framework for representing knowledge. In P. Winston (Ed.), The psychology of computer vision. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1975). Notes on a schema for stories. In D. G. Bobrow & A. Collins (Eds.), Representation and understanding (pp. 211-236). New York: Academic Press.
Stein, N. L., & Glenn, C. G. (1979). An analysis of story comprehension in elementary school children. In R. Freedle (Ed.), New directions in discourse processing. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
Thorndyke, P. W. (1977). Cognitive structures in comprehension and memory of narrative discourse. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 77-1 10.
Tierney, R. J., & Bridge, C. A. (1979). The functions of inferences: An extended examination of discourse analysis. In M. L. Kamil & A. J. Moe (Eds.), Reading research studies and applications (pp. 129-133). Clemsen, SC: The National Reading Conference. 444 MONA J. BEEBE ET AL.
Tierney, R. J., Bridge, C., & Cera, M. J. (1978). The discourse processing operations of children. Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 537-569.
van Dijk, T. A. (1977). Semantic macro-structures and knowledge frames in discourse comprehension. In M. A. Just & P. A. Carpenter (Eds.), Cognitive processes in comprehension (pp. 3-32). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1978). Cognitive psychology and discourse: Recalling and summarizing stories. In W. U. Dressier (Ed.), Current trends in textlinguistics (pp. 61-80). New York: DeGruyter.
van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
Vinod, H. D. (1978). A survey of ridge regression and related techniques. Review of Economics and Statistics, 60, 121-131.
Téléchargements
Publié-e
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
Cette œuvre est sous licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International.
La Revue canadienne de l’éducation utilise la licence CC BY-NC-ND de Creative Commons.
