Getting the Point” of Literature
Relations Between Processing and Interpretation
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11273082 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Candice Burkett (University of Illinois Chicago, corresponding author), Susan R Goldman (0000-0002-9578-5618, University of Illinois Chicago) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 53 |
| Issue | 5-6 |
| Pages | 457-487 |
| Publication date | 2016-07-03 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Discourse Processes (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0163-853X • E-ISSN: 1532-6950 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/0163853x.2016.1169969 |
| OpenAlex | W2423930959 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 23 |
Comparisons of literary experts and novices indicate that experts engage in interpretive processes to “get the point” during their reading of literary texts but novices do not. In two studies the reading and interpretive processes of literary novices (undergraduates with no formal training in literature study) were elicited through think-alouds during reading and a post-reading interview task. Twenty undergraduates read one of two short stories in each of two studies (n = 80). Both studies used the same methodology, except that the instructions for Study 2 emphasized the importance of interpretation when reading literary short stories. Results indicate that literary novices noticed cues to interpretive meaning during reading but were more likely to provide literary interpretations (symbolic and thematic) during the interview task as compared with when reading (Study 1 and 2) and when the instructions emphasized interpretation (Study 2 as compared with Study 1). In both studies there were positive relationships between elaborative processing during reading and (1) providing interpretations during reading and thinking aloud and (2) producing prompted interpretations during the post-reading interview task. The present studies provide evidence that literary novices can and do generate literary interpretations, albeit less sophisticated than those experts would likely generate. Further, elaborative processing during reading was positively related to interpretations. Implications for instruction to enhance literary interpretations are discussed
Cognitive psychology · Interpretation (philosophy · Linguistics · Literary criticism · Meaning (existential · Point (geometry · Reading (process · Reading comprehension · Task (project management · Think aloud protocol · Computer Science · Educational Strategies and Epistemologies · Media Influence and Health · Psychology · Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
Eliciting Self‐Explanations Improves Understanding
A new readability yardstick.
A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales
Comprehension of Short Stories
Students making sense of informational text
Sert
Learning from text
Conscious understanding during comprehension
Exposure to Print and Orthographic Processing
A Taxonomy of Skills in Reading and Interpreting Fiction
Literary expertise in the description of a fictional narrative
Point-driven understanding
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,5 |
| Citation span | 2018 - 2025 (8) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 4 |