D. McNamara, Natalie Newton, Katerina Christhilf, Kathryn S. McCarthy, Joseph P. Magliano, L. Allen
{"title":"锚定你的桥梁:自我解释中转述对推理的重要性","authors":"D. McNamara, Natalie Newton, Katerina Christhilf, Kathryn S. McCarthy, Joseph P. Magliano, L. Allen","doi":"10.1080/0163853X.2023.2225757","DOIUrl":null,"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":"60 1","pages":"337 - 362"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":null,\"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\":\"60 1\",\"pages\":\"337 - 362\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Discourse Processes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2023.2225757\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discourse Processes","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2023.2225757","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Anchoring your bridge: the importance of paraphrasing to inference making in self-explanations
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.
期刊介绍:
Discourse Processes is a multidisciplinary journal providing a forum for cross-fertilization of ideas from diverse disciplines sharing a common interest in discourse--prose comprehension and recall, dialogue analysis, text grammar construction, computer simulation of natural language, cross-cultural comparisons of communicative competence, or related topics. The problems posed by multisentence contexts and the methods required to investigate them, although not always unique to discourse, are sufficiently distinct so as to require an organized mode of scientific interaction made possible through the journal.