The Effect of Structure on the Memory for Procedural Text
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13664011 |
|---|---|
| Authors | John F Geiger (0000-0002-8830-5428, Cameron University, corresponding author), Sarah S Downen (University of Oklahoma) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 124 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 1621-1633 |
| Publication date | 2020-07-22 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Psychological Reports (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0033-2941 • E-ISSN: 1558-691X |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0033294120942915 |
| PMID | 32698665 |
| OpenAlex | W3044361836 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 20 |
The present study examined how the structure of procedural texts affected recall of those texts. Past research has found that procedural text is comprehended best when readers expend a moderate amount of effort in processing it; the amount of effort may depend on the structure of the procedural text. Sixty-three participants read six procedural texts describing how to construct simple machines. One group of participants read texts that contained a diagram of the object, whereas the other group read texts with no diagram. Two types of texts were presented: Narrative and list-like procedural texts. Results showed that rereading increased recall of the list-like text, but had little effect for the narrative text. The elaboration hypothesis explains the recall differences after a single reading, but it is still unclear why the list-like texts were recalled better than the narrative texts after a second reading
Cognition · Cognitive psychology · Construct (python library · Elaboration · Humanities · Linguistics · Narrative · Object (grammar · Procedural memory · Reading (process · Recall · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Educational Strategies and Epistemologies · Psychology · Reading and Literacy Development · Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |