The effects of local and global coherence on the processing and recall of history and science texts.

摘要

Using the Material-Appropriate Processing Theory (e.g., Einstein, McDaniel, Owen, & Cote, 1990; McDaniel & Einstein, 1989; McDaniel, Einstein, Dunay, & Cobb, 1986) as a framework, the present study examined the effects of local and global text revisions on the processing and recall of texts from the content areas of history and science. One hundred college participants talked out loud as they read a history and a science passage that varied in terms of local and global coherence relations. Participants then engaged in a free-recall task. Analysis of the think-aloud data revealed no significant main effects of content area or type of revision on readers' attempts to establish local and global coherence. Processing differences that were observed suggest readers of history and science passages may access background knowledge to a different degree while reading, or may adopt different kinds of passive reading strategies. When reading history as opposed to science passages, participants were more likely to make comment such as "Nothing comes to mind here" or "I can't think of what to say here"; when reading science as opposed to history passages, participants were more likely to make comments such as "Okay", "I see", and "That makes sense". Although overall amount recalled from the passages did not vary as a function of content area or type or revision, amount recalled from science passages was significantly related to amount of local-level processing and number of college-level science courses taken; amount recalled from history passages was significantly related to amount of local- and global-level processing. This suggests a difference in the way history and science readers rely on background knowledge and text structure in order to retrieve textual information. Overall, results of this study indicate that similar types of text revisions can have the same effect on the processing and recall of history and science texts. However, differences in the way in which history and science texts are processed by readers, in addition to the unique relationships between history recall, science recall, processing strategies, and background knowledge variables, suggest that attention must be paid to developing appropriate reading instruction within the content areas.