| Literature DB >> 2137862 |
C R Fletcher1, J E Hummel, C J Marsolek.
Abstract
Recent research has suggested that each statement in a narrative text is understood by relating it to its causal antecedents and consequences and that the text as a whole is understood by finding a causal path linking its opening to its final outcome. Fletcher and Bloom (1988) have proposed that in order to accomplish this goal, while minimizing the number of times long-term memory has to be searched, readers focus their attention on the last clause of a narrative that has causal antecedents but no consequences in the preceding text. As a result, a statement that is followed by a causal antecedent should remain the focus of attention, while the same statement followed by a consequence should not. This prediction was tested and confirmed in three experiments which show that when a target statement is followed by a sentence that includes only causal antecedents, (a) continuation sentences related to it are read more quickly, (b) target words drawn from it are easier to recognize, and (c) subject-generated continuations are more likely to be causally related to it.Mesh:
Year: 1990 PMID: 2137862 DOI: 10.1037//0278-7393.16.2.233
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn ISSN: 0278-7393 Impact factor: 3.051