John P. Rickards

The encoding versus the external storage hypothesis in note taking

Abstract College students ( N = 85) read a passage in which each sentence had been normatively assessed as to its importance to the overall meaning of the passage. Students expecting an essay examination took notes on sentences of higher structural importance than those anticipating a multiple choice test, even though there was no difference in the number of notes taken or in total test performance. The students took notes on 31% of the passage sentences and such notes were of high structural importance value. Most importantly, note taking seemed to serve as both an encoding device and as an external storage mechanism, with the latter being the more important function. The external storage function not only led to enhanced recall of the notes, but also facilitated the reconstruction of other parts of the passage.

Inserted questions as aids to reading text

There has been a major shift in the psychology of language from a behavioristic to a cognitive view of learning. One important reason for this shift in thinking was that behavioristic theory simply could not account for language behavior as portrayed in Chomskys theory of language. Within educational psychology, instructional research has assumed a more cognitive posture as well, particularly research involving the stimulation of prose processing through interspersing questions in text. Originally based on the associative or behavioristic model, early (1965–1970) adjunct question research can be characterized as having a “variables orientation”. Within this orientation, primary consideration was given to examining the effects of manipulating question position (before or after text segments) and question frequency on text comprehension. In this early research, inserted questions were invariably pitched at a rote or verbatim learning level. Since the onset (c. 1970) of the cognitive revolution, however, adjunct question research has been focussed on examining the effects of different cognitive levels of inserted questions on text comprehension, and on developing methods for assessing processes produced by adjunct questions. However, the degree to which cognitive levels as operationalyzed in the experiments reviewed here captures the richness of cognition as it occurs in the schools is, of course, open to question. Other areas of cognitively-oriented research include the assessment of the relationship between individual differences and adjunct question treatments, and the generation of questions by subjects while reading. This more recent thrust in adjunct question research can be termed a “processes orientation”. Research associated with both the “variables orientation” and the “processes orientation” are reviewed. Finally, some remarks are made concerning the paucity of theory in adjunct question research, the possible use of semantic memory theories as a basis for future research within the adjunct question paradigm, and the need for new question paradigms that more closely “match” question answering in general.

Depressive effects of underlining and adjunct questions on children's recall of text

Half of a sample of ten-year-old school children (N=69) were given conceptual postquestions after every paragraph of text, while the other half were not given any postquestions. Additionally, these children either generated their own underlining of one sentence per paragraph, received text with topic sentences underlined for them, or were given text without underlining of any kind. The results indicated that the readers preponderantly chose for underlining subordinate, passage details rather than superordinate, conceptual material, even when given conceptual postquestions focusing on the topic sentences of the passage. Recall of passage details was most depressed when children were provided with both underlining and conceptual postquestions. These results suggested a comprehension rather than a metacomprehension deficit, whereby underlining and adjunct questions may hinder rather than help recall performance in young readers.

Type of Verbatim Question Interspersed in Text: A New Look at the Position Effecta

Verbatim adjunct questions were developed from sentences rated by college students as high or low in importance to the overall meaning or structure of the experimental passage. The high structural importance pre- and postquestion groups were equal in recall of the questioned statements, and both groups outperformed the reading only control group. On the other hand, subjects who were given low structural importance prequestions recalled more questioned material than those who received low structural importance postquestions, and, in this case, only the prequestion treatment excelled the control condition. Finally, low structural importance prequestions depressed incidental recall below that of the control group. No other questioning treatment influenced incidental recall. These results support earlier research using a different question typology in suggesting that the generalization that postquestions yield greater retention than prequestions does not hold for all types of verbatim adjunct questions.

Processing Effects of Common-Word and Number Questions Inserted in Reading Materials.

AbstractWhile reading an 800-word passage, college students (N=55) received before or after every two paragraphs of text a common- word question, a number question, or no adjunct question of any kind. With respect to intentional learning, both types of inserted questions yielded equivalent recall regardless of their relative position in text. However, while number pre- and postquestions both produced greater recall than that of the control group, only common-word postquestions were significantly (p > .05) effective in this regard. Neither common-word nor number postquestions generated a significant (p <.05) degree of incidental learning. In fact, number postquestions produced a slight negative mathemagenic effect. The results are discussed in terms of the processes generated by these different types of adjunct questions.

Whole Versus Part Presentation of Advance Organizers in Text.

AbstractCollege students (N=51) read a 600-word passage. Advance organizers (Ausubel) were either interspersed in the text contiguous with related paragraphs (part method) or were presented en masse before the entire passage (whole method). Additionally, a reading-only control group was employed. The whole and part method of presenting advance organizers yielded equivalent recall of passage information and neither experimental group exceeded the control group in this regard. However, both advance organizer groups produced significantly (p>.01) more recall than the control group of the organizers themselves. These results are similar to those commonly found with another type of reading aid, adjunct questions.

On inserting questions before or after segments of text

Abstract It has been concluded in all major reviews of adjunct question research that a group given questions after related text segments (postquestions) yields greater recall than a group given questions before related text segments (prequestions) or one not given any questions at all. However, closer examination of the earlier research and an analysis of recent research reveals that for certain types of verbatim questions and for certain high level questions, postquestions produce recall equivalent to or less than prequestions. Moreover, in many studies wherein postquestions exceed prequestions, the postquestion group equals the reading-only control group in recall of nonquestioned (incidental) material. Hence, despite frequent pronouncements to the contrary, no firm recommendation can be made regarding the optimal placement of adjunct questions in text material.

Affective Outcomes of Evaluation Strategies by Self and Another in Children's Learning from Textbook Material

78 fourth grade children were randomly assigned to one of two evaluation groups which read and answered questions on textbook material. One group (self-evaluation) judged the correctness of their answers and reinforced themselves, while the other group (other-evaluation) was judged and reinforced by some other person. Results showed that girls accepted more responsibility for unsuccessful academic performance than boys and that in the self-evaluation condition boys were significantly less anxious than girls and less likely to lie. The results further suggested that boys who evaluated themselves tended to experience reduced anxiety and have enhanced self-concept more than boys who were evaluated by others.

How Personal Evaluation Affects the Underlining and Recall of Prose Material

The influence of personal evaluation from the experimenter on the underlining and recall of prose material was investigated for college undergraduates (N = 135). Subjects who received positive personal evaluation performed better on the underlining task and on the recall of nonunderlined material than subjects who received negative personal evaluatoion. Subjects who received no personal evaluation also performed better on the underlining task than subjects who received negative personal evaluation. Implications for education are presented.