Yasuhiro Ozuru

On the formation of collective memories: The role of a dominant narrator

To test our hypothesis that conversations can contribute to the formation of collective memory, we asked participants to study stories and to recall them individually (pregroup recollection), then as a group (group recounting), and then once again individually (postgroup recollection}). One way that postgroup collective memories can be formed under these circumstances is if unshared pregroup recollections in the group recounting influences others’ postgroup recollections. In the present research, we explored (using tests of recall and recognition) whether the presence of a dominant narrator can facilitate the emergence of unshared pregroup recollections in a group recounting and whether this emergence is associated with changes in postgroup recollections. We argue that the formation of a collective memory through conversation is not inevitable but is limited by cognitive factors, such as conditions for social contagion, and by situational factors, such as the presence of a narrator.

Where's the difficulty in standardized reading tests: The passage or the question?

The purpose of this investigation was to examine the extent to which item and text characteristics predict item difficulty on the comprehension portion of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests for the 7th–9th and 10th–12th grade levels. Detailed item-based analyses were performed on 192 comprehension questions on the basis of the cognitive processing model framework proposed by Embretson and colleagues (Embretson & Wetzel, 1987). Item difficulty was analyzed in terms of various passage features (e.g., word frequency and number of propositions) and individual-question characteristics (e.g., abstractness and degree of inferential processing), using hierarchical linear modeling. The results indicated that the difficulty of the items in the test for the 7th–9th grade level is primarily influenced by text features—in particular, vocabulary difficulty—whereas the difficulty of the items in the test for the 10th–12th grade level is less systematically influenced by text features.

Comparing Comprehension Measured by Multiple-Choice and Open-Ended Questions

This study compared the nature of text comprehension as measured by multiple-choice format and open-ended format questions. Participants read a short text while explaining preselected sentences. After reading the text, participants answered open-ended and multiple-choice versions of the same questions based on their memory of the text content. The results indicated that performance on open-ended questions was correlated with the quality of self-explanations, but performance on multiple-choice questions was correlated with the level of prior knowledge related to the text. These results suggest that open-ended and multiple-choice format questions measure different aspects of comprehension processes. The results are discussed in terms of dual process theories of text comprehension.

Surface features of utterances, credibility judgments, and memory.

Information acquired in conversation is often not credible, which makes monitoring its credibility critical. Listeners of conversations often use surface features of utterances, such as pause and intonation, to guide their credibility judgments. In this research, we explore whether listeners’ delayed credibility judgments about remembered information are affected by the surface features of the speakers’ utterances. In addition, we examine some of the specific factors involved in this issue: (1) how listeners’ listening strategies influence their subsequent credibility judgments and (2) how the type of surface features of the utterances influences listeners’ ability to make delayed credibility judgments. The results indicate that intonation of the utterances continues to influence listeners’ assessment of the credibility of remembered information, that the influences of intonation depend on listening strategies, and that people have difficulty using/remembering pause length when making a delayed credibility judgment. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Why do people disagree with a statement they do not understand? Relations between comprehension and evaluation of a simple assertion

This article presents the results of a quasi-experimental study that examined the relation between the metacomprehension (i.e., understand/do not understand) and evaluative (i.e., agree/disagree) response to a simple one-sentence statement to compare the relative timing in which these two responses are generated in the course of sentence processing. In the study, participants were asked to provide metacomprehension and evaluative judgements to simple one-sentence assertions, and their response times were measured. Two of the main findings are: first, the response time for the evaluative judgement is faster than the response time for the metacomprehension judgement and, second, the faster response time of the evaluative judgement relative to the metacomprehension judgement is more pronounced either when they are not sure about whether they understand a statement or when they feel they do not understand a statement. The findings are analysed in relation to a multiple constraint satisfaction model of sentence comprehension to generate a possible processing model of a simple one-sentence assertion underlying the generation of metacomprehension and evaluative responses.