Literature DB >> 35505178

A measure of individual differences in readers' approaches to text and its relation to reading experience and reading comprehension.

Regina C Calloway1,2, Anne Helder3, Charles A Perfetti4,5.   

Abstract

Readers have different motivations and approaches to text that covers a range of topics and difficulty levels. We introduce the concept of readers' approaches to text to establish a link between motivational and cognitive aspects of reading comprehension. Study 1 describes the development of a self-report measure of readers' approaches to text with a community sample. An exploratory factor analysis revealed that The Readers' Approaches to Text Questionnaire (TReAT-Q) had four subscales: (1) intrinsic goals, (2) extrinsic goals and strategies, (3) effort at understanding, and (4) avoidance of text difficulty. Aside from avoidance of text difficulty, these factors predicted adults' reading experience above and beyond the related, but more general, measure of need for cognition. A confirmatory factor analysis on TReAT-Q in Study 2 revealed that all subscales except effort at understanding contributed to a readers' approaches to text latent construct for college students. A subsequent structural equation model (SEM) evaluating a cognitive model of reading comprehension showed that college students' TReAT-Q scores predicted reading comprehension through an indirect pathway, mediated by reading experience and vocabulary knowledge. Readers who enjoy reading and deploy reading strategies to meet a desired level of understanding tend to have more reading experiences. The SEM also demonstrated the mediating role of vocabulary knowledge in text comprehension by linking reading experience and reading comprehension. Extending beyond measures of motivation, TReAT-Q incorporates the positive and negative approaches readers have to texts, which is fundamental for assessing what readers gain from their reading experiences that assists reading comprehension.
© 2022. The Psychonomic Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adult readers; Individual differences; Questionnaire development; Reading comprehension; Reading motivation; Structural equation modeling

Year:  2022        PMID: 35505178     DOI: 10.3758/s13428-022-01852-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Res Methods        ISSN: 1554-351X


  17 in total

1.  Speaking up for vocabulary: reading skill differences in young adults.

Authors:  David Braze; Whitney Tabor; Donald P Shankweiler; W Einar Mencl
Journal:  J Learn Disabil       Date:  2007 May-Jun

2.  Reading development in adults.

Authors:  J S Chall
Journal:  Ann Dyslexia       Date:  1987-01

3.  Children's inference generation: The role of vocabulary and working memory.

Authors:  Nicola Kate Currie; Kate Cain
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  2015-04-27

4.  Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later.

Authors:  A E Cunningham; K E Stanovich
Journal:  Dev Psychol       Date:  1997-11

5.  The Influence of Reading on Vocabulary Growth: A Case for a Matthew Effect.

Authors:  Dawna Duff; J Bruce Tomblin; Hugh Catts
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 2.297

6.  The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model.

Authors:  W Kintsch
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1988-04       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  Empirical validation of reading and spelling quotients.

Authors:  J M Finucci; S D Isaacs; C C Whitehouse; B Childs
Journal:  Dev Med Child Neurol       Date:  1982-12       Impact factor: 5.449

8.  Does Online Comprehension Monitoring Make a Unique Contribution to Reading Comprehension in Beginning Readers? Evidence from Eye Movements.

Authors:  Young-Suk Grace Kim; Christian Vorstius; Ralph Radach
Journal:  Sci Stud Read       Date:  2018-04-05

9.  Individual differences in fifth graders' reading and language predict their comprehension monitoring development: An eye-movement study.

Authors:  Carol McDonald Connor; Ralph Radach; Christian Vorstius; Stephanie L Day; Leigh McLean; Frederick J Morrison
Journal:  Sci Stud Read       Date:  2015

10.  The Process and Product of Coherence Monitoring in Young Readers: Effects of Reader and Text Characteristics.

Authors:  Nicola K Currie; Gillian Francey; Robert Davies; Shelley Gray; Mindy S Bridges; Maria Adelaida Restrepo; Marilyn S Thompson; Margeaux F Ciraolo; Jinxiang Hu; Kate Cain
Journal:  Sci Stud Read       Date:  2020-10-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.