Pub Date : 2023-07-03DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2023.2225981
Daryl Axelrod, J. Kahn
ABSTRACT Large-scale data and data visualizations are ubiquitous now in the stories that shape our society. In particular, these stories influence youth and families’ communication and understanding of scientific, social, and personal issues. Consequently, we need to better understand how youth and families can engage and learn with the tools that generate such narratives. This study reports on a qualitative analysis of 13 data discussions with families that used data visualization tools to explore georeferenced data connected to their family migration histories. We developed the Co-Construct, Situate, Advance a Theory (CSAT) model, from family cases, which details the discursive and interactional processes by which families tell personal stories grounded in data displays. Extending earlier studies of storytelling as theory-building in family conversations, our model provides an understanding of families’ discursive practices around data exploration. We discuss implications for family learning with data technologies.
{"title":"Families’ discursive practices in data discussions about migration histories","authors":"Daryl Axelrod, J. Kahn","doi":"10.1080/0163853X.2023.2225981","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2023.2225981","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Large-scale data and data visualizations are ubiquitous now in the stories that shape our society. In particular, these stories influence youth and families’ communication and understanding of scientific, social, and personal issues. Consequently, we need to better understand how youth and families can engage and learn with the tools that generate such narratives. This study reports on a qualitative analysis of 13 data discussions with families that used data visualization tools to explore georeferenced data connected to their family migration histories. We developed the Co-Construct, Situate, Advance a Theory (CSAT) model, from family cases, which details the discursive and interactional processes by which families tell personal stories grounded in data displays. Extending earlier studies of storytelling as theory-building in family conversations, our model provides an understanding of families’ discursive practices around data exploration. We discuss implications for family learning with data technologies.","PeriodicalId":11316,"journal":{"name":"Discourse Processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47978476","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-03DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2023.2225980
Nicola K. Currie, K. Cain
ABSTRACT We examined knowledge-based inference in 6-, 8- and 10-year-olds. Participants listened to texts where the number of clues for an inference was manipulated and then judged whether single-word probes (target inference, competing inference, literal word from the text and an unrelated concept) were related to the story. Accuracy and response times were analyzed with mixed-effects models. Inference accuracy was higher with three clues, and older children responded to the inference more accurately and quickly than younger children. The inference and literal probes were compared: 10-year-olds responded more accurately and quickly to the inference; however, 6-year-olds were more accurate for the literal. We propose that by 10-years of age, children are able to activate knowledge-based inferences while listening to text. All age groups had some inhibition difficulty, with less accurate and slower responses for the competing inference than the unrelated concept. Inference instruction should be sensitive to developmental differences in inferential processing.
{"title":"Developmental differences in children’s generation of knowledge-based inferences","authors":"Nicola K. Currie, K. Cain","doi":"10.1080/0163853X.2023.2225980","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2023.2225980","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We examined knowledge-based inference in 6-, 8- and 10-year-olds. Participants listened to texts where the number of clues for an inference was manipulated and then judged whether single-word probes (target inference, competing inference, literal word from the text and an unrelated concept) were related to the story. Accuracy and response times were analyzed with mixed-effects models. Inference accuracy was higher with three clues, and older children responded to the inference more accurately and quickly than younger children. The inference and literal probes were compared: 10-year-olds responded more accurately and quickly to the inference; however, 6-year-olds were more accurate for the literal. We propose that by 10-years of age, children are able to activate knowledge-based inferences while listening to text. All age groups had some inhibition difficulty, with less accurate and slower responses for the competing inference than the unrelated concept. Inference instruction should be sensitive to developmental differences in inferential processing.","PeriodicalId":11316,"journal":{"name":"Discourse Processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45614116","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-28DOI: 10.1080/0163853x.2023.2200506
D. Greenberg, Jason L. G. Braasch, Elizabeth L. Tighe
{"title":"Introduction to special issue","authors":"D. Greenberg, Jason L. G. Braasch, Elizabeth L. Tighe","doi":"10.1080/0163853x.2023.2200506","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853x.2023.2200506","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11316,"journal":{"name":"Discourse Processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49097719","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-28DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2023.2225757
D. McNamara, Natalie Newton, Katerina Christhilf, Kathryn S. McCarthy, Joseph P. Magliano, L. Allen
ABSTRACT Analyzing constructed responses, such as think-alouds or self-explanations, can reveal valuable information about readers’ comprehension strategies. The current study expands on the extant work by (1) investigating combinations and patterns of comprehension strategies that readers use and (2) examining the extent to which these patterns relate to individual differences and comprehension outcomes. We leveraged archival data from three datasets (n = 472) to examine how comprehension strategy use varied across datasets, texts, and populations (high school, undergraduate). Students’ self-explanations were coded for strategy use and then further analyzed in terms of combinations and patterns of strategies. Our analyses revealed that almost all readers primarily engaged in paraphrasing and/or the combination of paraphrasing and bridging, with few instances of elaboration. Further, the combination of paraphrasing and bridging was the best predictor of performance on a comprehension test. In terms of patterns, switching between strategies was not correlated to reading comprehension and was negatively correlated with the combination of paraphrasing and bridging. Understanding which strategy combinations and patterns are optimal can be used to inform adaptive instruction and feedback that can aid in more individualized support for readers.
{"title":"Anchoring your bridge: the importance of paraphrasing to inference making in self-explanations","authors":"D. McNamara, Natalie Newton, Katerina Christhilf, Kathryn S. McCarthy, Joseph P. Magliano, L. Allen","doi":"10.1080/0163853X.2023.2225757","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2023.2225757","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Analyzing constructed responses, such as think-alouds or self-explanations, can reveal valuable information about readers’ comprehension strategies. The current study expands on the extant work by (1) investigating combinations and patterns of comprehension strategies that readers use and (2) examining the extent to which these patterns relate to individual differences and comprehension outcomes. We leveraged archival data from three datasets (n = 472) to examine how comprehension strategy use varied across datasets, texts, and populations (high school, undergraduate). Students’ self-explanations were coded for strategy use and then further analyzed in terms of combinations and patterns of strategies. Our analyses revealed that almost all readers primarily engaged in paraphrasing and/or the combination of paraphrasing and bridging, with few instances of elaboration. Further, the combination of paraphrasing and bridging was the best predictor of performance on a comprehension test. In terms of patterns, switching between strategies was not correlated to reading comprehension and was negatively correlated with the combination of paraphrasing and bridging. Understanding which strategy combinations and patterns are optimal can be used to inform adaptive instruction and feedback that can aid in more individualized support for readers.","PeriodicalId":11316,"journal":{"name":"Discourse Processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41646725","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-17DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2023.2197692
Alexandra List
ABSTRACT In this paper, I apply the Multiple Documents Text-Based Relevance Assessment and Content Extraction (MD-TRACE) model, to describe the types of cognitive processes that students engage to critically reason about social issues, as they are portrayed through mass media. In addition to examining such processes, I further consider the extent to which these are reflective of social justice reasoning, or students’ critical reasoning about social issues in ways that recognize and analyze inequities in society. Three studies are introduced to provide empirical examples of how cognitive processes, identified in the MD-TRACE, may function within the context of students’ reasoning about mass media. The processes examined include selection (Study 1), processing (Study 2), and integration (Study 3). Study 1 examines the types of perspectives that students propose seeking out in association with various social issues and the extent to which these perspectives may belong to marginalized groups (i.e., selection). Study 2 examines students’ critical reasoning about or abilities to critique two deliberately constructed texts during processing. Study 3 investigates students’ specific abilities to identify and critique narrative frames, or common reporting tropes, introduced across texts (i.e., integration). Together, these three studies serve as exemplars of students’ engagement in reasoning about mass media and social justice reasoning. They suggest that social justice reasoning involves, in part, students’ engagement in perspective taking, their application of prior knowledge to contextualize information in texts, and their recognition of common narrative frames across texts and the values that these uphold. Additional social justice reasoning strategies are suggested and directions for future research proposed.
{"title":"Social justice reasoning when students learn about social issues using multiple texts","authors":"Alexandra List","doi":"10.1080/0163853X.2023.2197692","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2023.2197692","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this paper, I apply the Multiple Documents Text-Based Relevance Assessment and Content Extraction (MD-TRACE) model, to describe the types of cognitive processes that students engage to critically reason about social issues, as they are portrayed through mass media. In addition to examining such processes, I further consider the extent to which these are reflective of social justice reasoning, or students’ critical reasoning about social issues in ways that recognize and analyze inequities in society. Three studies are introduced to provide empirical examples of how cognitive processes, identified in the MD-TRACE, may function within the context of students’ reasoning about mass media. The processes examined include selection (Study 1), processing (Study 2), and integration (Study 3). Study 1 examines the types of perspectives that students propose seeking out in association with various social issues and the extent to which these perspectives may belong to marginalized groups (i.e., selection). Study 2 examines students’ critical reasoning about or abilities to critique two deliberately constructed texts during processing. Study 3 investigates students’ specific abilities to identify and critique narrative frames, or common reporting tropes, introduced across texts (i.e., integration). Together, these three studies serve as exemplars of students’ engagement in reasoning about mass media and social justice reasoning. They suggest that social justice reasoning involves, in part, students’ engagement in perspective taking, their application of prior knowledge to contextualize information in texts, and their recognition of common narrative frames across texts and the values that these uphold. Additional social justice reasoning strategies are suggested and directions for future research proposed.","PeriodicalId":11316,"journal":{"name":"Discourse Processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41437988","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-17DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2023.2206773
L. S. Eekhof, Kobie van Krieken, J. Sanders, Roel M. Willems
ABSTRACT This article explores the role of text and reader characteristics in character engagement experiences. In an online study, participants completed several self-report and behavioral measures of social-cognitive abilities and read two literary narratives in which the presence of linguistic viewpoint markers was varied using a highly controlled manipulation strategy. Afterward, participants reported on their character engagement experiences. A principal component analysis on participants’ responses revealed the multidimensional nature of character engagement, which included both self- and other-oriented emotional responses (e.g., empathy, personal distress) as well as more cognitive responses (e.g., identification, perspective taking). Furthermore, character engagement was found to rely on a wide range of social-cognitive abilities but not on the presence of viewpoint markers. Finally, and most importantly, we did not find convincing evidence for an interplay between social-cognitive abilities and the presence of viewpoint markers. These findings suggest that readers rely on their social-cognitive abilities to engage with the inner worlds of fictional others, more so than on the lexical cues of those inner worlds provided by the text.
{"title":"Engagement with narrative characters: the role of social-cognitive abilities and linguistic viewpoint","authors":"L. S. Eekhof, Kobie van Krieken, J. Sanders, Roel M. Willems","doi":"10.1080/0163853X.2023.2206773","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2023.2206773","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article explores the role of text and reader characteristics in character engagement experiences. In an online study, participants completed several self-report and behavioral measures of social-cognitive abilities and read two literary narratives in which the presence of linguistic viewpoint markers was varied using a highly controlled manipulation strategy. Afterward, participants reported on their character engagement experiences. A principal component analysis on participants’ responses revealed the multidimensional nature of character engagement, which included both self- and other-oriented emotional responses (e.g., empathy, personal distress) as well as more cognitive responses (e.g., identification, perspective taking). Furthermore, character engagement was found to rely on a wide range of social-cognitive abilities but not on the presence of viewpoint markers. Finally, and most importantly, we did not find convincing evidence for an interplay between social-cognitive abilities and the presence of viewpoint markers. These findings suggest that readers rely on their social-cognitive abilities to engage with the inner worlds of fictional others, more so than on the lexical cues of those inner worlds provided by the text.","PeriodicalId":11316,"journal":{"name":"Discourse Processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44197645","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-17DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2023.2203543
J. Hollander, J. Sabatini, A. Graesser, D. Greenberg, T. O’Reilly, Jan C. Frijters
ABSTRACT Adult literacy learners are characterized by their diversity, both in terms of educational histories and cognitive skill sets. Accounting for the specific strengths and weaknesses of each learner is vital to the assessment of literacy gains and optimization of educational systems. We examined pre- and postdifference scores on a component reading skills assessment battery collected before and after an instructional program that included an adult comprehension-focused intelligent tutoring system. By characterizing learners during instruction, we examined differential gains in foundational reading skills. Most learners made gains in reading skills above the word recognition and decoding level; readers who were classified as “conscientious” (who performed slowly but accurately) tended to make the most substantial gains. We conclude that this hybrid instructional program may be an effective educational environment for adult literacy and describe how characterizing learners via integrating assessments into adaptive instructional practice may improve efficiency and effectiveness.
{"title":"Importance of Learner Characteristics in Intelligent Tutoring for Adult Literacy","authors":"J. Hollander, J. Sabatini, A. Graesser, D. Greenberg, T. O’Reilly, Jan C. Frijters","doi":"10.1080/0163853X.2023.2203543","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2023.2203543","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Adult literacy learners are characterized by their diversity, both in terms of educational histories and cognitive skill sets. Accounting for the specific strengths and weaknesses of each learner is vital to the assessment of literacy gains and optimization of educational systems. We examined pre- and postdifference scores on a component reading skills assessment battery collected before and after an instructional program that included an adult comprehension-focused intelligent tutoring system. By characterizing learners during instruction, we examined differential gains in foundational reading skills. Most learners made gains in reading skills above the word recognition and decoding level; readers who were classified as “conscientious” (who performed slowly but accurately) tended to make the most substantial gains. We conclude that this hybrid instructional program may be an effective educational environment for adult literacy and describe how characterizing learners via integrating assessments into adaptive instructional practice may improve efficiency and effectiveness.","PeriodicalId":11316,"journal":{"name":"Discourse Processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44152596","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-08DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2023.2197690
Lena Hildenbrand, J. Wiley
ABSTRACT The present study examined the relationship between working memory capacity (WMC) and comprehension on a multiple text assessment from the ACT test for college preparedness in which texts are available during question answering. Specifically, it was of interest whether differences in relations would be seen across different question types. Only performance on the inference questions was uniquely related to WMC whereas performance on textbase and across-text questions was not. Results suggest that WMC still plays a role in comprehension even when texts are available, and the role of WMC seems to be most strongly tied to integration demands.
{"title":"Working memory capacity as a predictor of multiple text comprehension","authors":"Lena Hildenbrand, J. Wiley","doi":"10.1080/0163853X.2023.2197690","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2023.2197690","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The present study examined the relationship between working memory capacity (WMC) and comprehension on a multiple text assessment from the ACT test for college preparedness in which texts are available during question answering. Specifically, it was of interest whether differences in relations would be seen across different question types. Only performance on the inference questions was uniquely related to WMC whereas performance on textbase and across-text questions was not. Results suggest that WMC still plays a role in comprehension even when texts are available, and the role of WMC seems to be most strongly tied to integration demands.","PeriodicalId":11316,"journal":{"name":"Discourse Processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44296444","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-01DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2023.2198813
Giulia Scapin, Cristina Loi, F. Hakemulder, K. Bálint, E. Konijn
ABSTRACT A considerable body of research has examined the age-old assertion that reading literature enhances empathy, however, mixed results have been found. The present study attempts to clarify such disparities, investigating the role of foregrounding in possible differences in readers’ processing of literary texts and its connection with readers’ empathic reactions. We asked participants (N = 78) to mark parts of the text they considered as “foregrounding” (i.e., deviating from “normal” discourse), and we analyzed how they processed these stylistic aspects. Participants’ open responses to one of two selected texts were categorized as either Shallow, Failed, Partial, or Full Processing of Foregrounding. Full processing was associated with higher Comprehensive State Empathy Scale scores than Failed Processing. Stylistic analysis of word combinations that participants marked as “striking” suggests that, rather than stylistic devices per se, readers’ depth of processing may enhance state empathy.
{"title":"The role of processing foregrounding in empathic reactions in literary reading","authors":"Giulia Scapin, Cristina Loi, F. Hakemulder, K. Bálint, E. Konijn","doi":"10.1080/0163853X.2023.2198813","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2023.2198813","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT A considerable body of research has examined the age-old assertion that reading literature enhances empathy, however, mixed results have been found. The present study attempts to clarify such disparities, investigating the role of foregrounding in possible differences in readers’ processing of literary texts and its connection with readers’ empathic reactions. We asked participants (N = 78) to mark parts of the text they considered as “foregrounding” (i.e., deviating from “normal” discourse), and we analyzed how they processed these stylistic aspects. Participants’ open responses to one of two selected texts were categorized as either Shallow, Failed, Partial, or Full Processing of Foregrounding. Full processing was associated with higher Comprehensive State Empathy Scale scores than Failed Processing. Stylistic analysis of word combinations that participants marked as “striking” suggests that, rather than stylistic devices per se, readers’ depth of processing may enhance state empathy.","PeriodicalId":11316,"journal":{"name":"Discourse Processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46162562","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：