{"title":"理解不同媒体形式的叙事:小学生理解文字和视频的过程与结果","authors":"Dianne Venneker, Anne Helder, Paul van den Broek","doi":"10.1007/s11145-024-10573-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study investigated similarities and differences in children’s (<i>N</i> = 83, grades 4–6) narrative comprehension between text, audio, and non-verbal video, including measures of both comprehension products and processes. The aim was to understand how children engage with information across various media and, in doing so, address inconsistent findings in the existing literature. Comprehension products were assessed through open-ended questions and recall, and comprehension processes through think-aloud protocols. Results revealed that children answered more comprehension questions correctly for video versions of the narratives than for text versions, particularly children with lower reading comprehension skills. No advantage of video over text was found for the recall task. Think-aloud responses during narrative comprehension revealed similar processing patterns for text and video, with a general tendency to report information close to the story rather than elaborate based on background knowledge. However, video versions prompted children to activate background knowledge to a greater extent than did text versions, suggesting an advantage of video at the situation-model level. Notably, differences between video and text versions cannot be attributed solely to the absence of decoding demands in video, as similar differences were found between video and audio versions. These results suggest (a) considerable similarities in both process and product across media, but (b) non-verbal videos elicit more situation-model processes than texts do, (c) non-verbal videos have an advantage over text with regard to performance on the comprehension questions, especially for less-skilled comprehenders. These findings illustrate the nuanced relationship between media affordances and comprehension processes and outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding narratives in different media formats: Processes and products of elementary-school children’s comprehension of texts and videos\",\"authors\":\"Dianne Venneker, Anne Helder, Paul van den Broek\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11145-024-10573-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This study investigated similarities and differences in children’s (<i>N</i> = 83, grades 4–6) narrative comprehension between text, audio, and non-verbal video, including measures of both comprehension products and processes. The aim was to understand how children engage with information across various media and, in doing so, address inconsistent findings in the existing literature. Comprehension products were assessed through open-ended questions and recall, and comprehension processes through think-aloud protocols. Results revealed that children answered more comprehension questions correctly for video versions of the narratives than for text versions, particularly children with lower reading comprehension skills. No advantage of video over text was found for the recall task. Think-aloud responses during narrative comprehension revealed similar processing patterns for text and video, with a general tendency to report information close to the story rather than elaborate based on background knowledge. However, video versions prompted children to activate background knowledge to a greater extent than did text versions, suggesting an advantage of video at the situation-model level. Notably, differences between video and text versions cannot be attributed solely to the absence of decoding demands in video, as similar differences were found between video and audio versions. These results suggest (a) considerable similarities in both process and product across media, but (b) non-verbal videos elicit more situation-model processes than texts do, (c) non-verbal videos have an advantage over text with regard to performance on the comprehension questions, especially for less-skilled comprehenders. These findings illustrate the nuanced relationship between media affordances and comprehension processes and outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48204,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reading and Writing\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reading and Writing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10573-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reading and Writing","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10573-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Understanding narratives in different media formats: Processes and products of elementary-school children’s comprehension of texts and videos
This study investigated similarities and differences in children’s (N = 83, grades 4–6) narrative comprehension between text, audio, and non-verbal video, including measures of both comprehension products and processes. The aim was to understand how children engage with information across various media and, in doing so, address inconsistent findings in the existing literature. Comprehension products were assessed through open-ended questions and recall, and comprehension processes through think-aloud protocols. Results revealed that children answered more comprehension questions correctly for video versions of the narratives than for text versions, particularly children with lower reading comprehension skills. No advantage of video over text was found for the recall task. Think-aloud responses during narrative comprehension revealed similar processing patterns for text and video, with a general tendency to report information close to the story rather than elaborate based on background knowledge. However, video versions prompted children to activate background knowledge to a greater extent than did text versions, suggesting an advantage of video at the situation-model level. Notably, differences between video and text versions cannot be attributed solely to the absence of decoding demands in video, as similar differences were found between video and audio versions. These results suggest (a) considerable similarities in both process and product across media, but (b) non-verbal videos elicit more situation-model processes than texts do, (c) non-verbal videos have an advantage over text with regard to performance on the comprehension questions, especially for less-skilled comprehenders. These findings illustrate the nuanced relationship between media affordances and comprehension processes and outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Reading and writing skills are fundamental to literacy. Consequently, the processes involved in reading and writing and the failure to acquire these skills, as well as the loss of once well-developed reading and writing abilities have been the targets of intense research activity involving professionals from a variety of disciplines, such as neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, psycholinguistics and education. The findings that have emanated from this research are most often written up in a lingua that is specific to the particular discipline involved, and are published in specialized journals. This generally leaves the expert in one area almost totally unaware of what may be taking place in any area other than their own. Reading and Writing cuts through this fog of jargon, breaking down the artificial boundaries between disciplines. The journal focuses on the interaction among various fields, such as linguistics, information processing, neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, speech and hearing science and education. Reading and Writing publishes high-quality, scientific articles pertaining to the processes, acquisition, and loss of reading and writing skills. The journal fully represents the necessarily interdisciplinary nature of research in the field, focusing on the interaction among various disciplines, such as linguistics, information processing, neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, speech and hearing science and education. Coverage in Reading and Writing includes models of reading, writing and spelling at all age levels; orthography and its relation to reading and writing; computer literacy; cross-cultural studies; and developmental and acquired disorders of reading and writing. It publishes research articles, critical reviews, theoretical papers, and case studies. Reading and Writing is one of the most highly cited journals in Education, Educational Research, and Educational Psychology.