Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

To answer questions from text, one has to understand what the question is asking: differential effects of question aids as a function of comprehension skill

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present study investigates the effectiveness of question paraphrases in supporting students’ understanding of a specific task. Secondary school students (i.e., eighth grade) read two texts and answered several questions while texts were available. A paraphrase including core information about each question was included before students provided their answer. Individual differences in reading comprehension explained the beneficial effect of paraphrases. Concretely, the presentation of paraphrases improved the performance of less-skilled but not skilled comprehenders. These findings are discussed in terms of the processes involved in task model formation and individual differences underlying these processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, R. C., & Biddle, W. B. (1975). On asking people questions about what they are reading. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 9, 89–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andre, T., & Thieman, A. (1988). Level of adjunct question, type of feedback, and learning concepts by reading. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 13, 296–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armbruster, B. B., & Armstrong, J. O. (1993). Locating information in text: A focus on children in the elementary grades. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 139–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Britt, M. A., Rouet, J.-F., & Durik, A. M. (2018). Literacy beyond text comprehension: A theory of purposeful reading. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cataldo, M. G., & Oakhill, J. (2000). Why are poor comprehenders inefficient searchers? An investigation into the effects of text representation and spatial memory on the ability to locate information in text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 791–799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cerdán, R., Gilabert, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2011). Selecting information to answer questions: Strategic individual differences when searching texts. Learning and Iindividual differences, 21, 201–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cerdán, R., Gilabert, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2013). Self-generated explanations on the question demands are not always helpful. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 16, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cerdán, R., Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, T., Gilabert, R., & Gil, L. (2009). Impact of question–answering tasks on search processes and reading comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 19, 13–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil, L., Martinez, T., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2015). Online assessment of strategic reading literacy skills. Computers & Education, 82, 50–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, S. R., & Durán, R. P. (1988). Answering questions from oceanography texts: Learner, task, and text characteristics. Discourse Processes, 11(4), 373–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannon, B., & Daneman, M. (2004). Shallow semantic processing of text: An individual-differences account. Discourse Processes, 37, 187–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, G. T., Boonthum, C., & McNamara, D. S. (2009). iSTART-ME: Situating extended learning within a game-based environment. In Proceedings of the workshop on intelligent educational games. 14th Annual conference on artificial intelligence in education (pp. 59–68). Brighton: AIED.

  • Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Llorens, A. C., & Cerdán, R. (2012). Assessing the comprehension of questions in task-oriented reading. Revista de Psicodidáctica, 17(2), 233–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorch, R. F., Jr., Lorch, E. P., & Klusewitz, M. A. (1993). College students’ conditional knowledge about reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 239–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magliano, J. P., & Millis, K. K. (2003). Assessing reading skill with a think-aloud procedure and latent semantic analysis. Cognition & Instruction, 21, 251–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez, T., Vidal-Abarca, E., Sellés, P., & Gilabert, R. (2008). Evaluación de las estrategias y procesos de comprensión: el Test de Procesos de Comprensión. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 31(3), 319–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (1984). Aids to text comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 19(1), 30–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, P. M., Guess, R. H., & McNamara, D. S. (2009). The components of paraphrase evaluations. Behavioral Research Methods, 41, 682–690.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrudden, M. T., & Schraw, G. (2007). Relevance and goal-focusing in text processing. Educational Psychology Review, 19(2), 113–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S. (2004). SERT: Self-explanation reading training. Discourse Processes, 38(1), 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. P. (2009). Self-explanation and metacognition: The dynamics of reading. In J. D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 60–81). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., Boonthum, C., Kurby, C. A., Magliano, J., Pillarisetti, S., & Bellissens, C. (2009). Interactive paraphrasing training: The development and testing of an iSTART module. In V. Dimitrova, R. Mizoguchi, B. du Boulay, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education; Building learning systems that care; From knowledge representation to affective modeling (pp. 181–188). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., O’Reilly, T., Best, R., & Ozuru, Y. (2006). Improving adolescent students’ reading comprehension with iSTART. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34, 147–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., Ozuru, Y., Best, R., & O'Reilly, T. (2007). The 4-pronged comprehension strategy framework. In D. S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies (pp. 465–496). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, B. J., Brandt, D. M., & Bluth, G. J. (1980). Use of top-level structure in text: Key for reading comprehension of ninth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 16(1), 72–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miyake, N., & Norman, D. A. (1979). To ask a question, one must know enough to know what is not known. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 357–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ness, M. (2011). Explicit reading comprehension instruction in elementary classrooms: Teacher use of reading comprehension strategies. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 25(1), 98–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oakhill, J., Yuill, N., & Donaldson, M. (1990). Understanding of causal expressions in skilled and less skilled text comprehenders. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 8, 401–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2009). PISA 2009: Assessment framework key competencies in reading, mathematics and science. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozuru, Y., Best, R., Bell, C., Witherspoon, A., & McNamara, D. S. (2007). Influence of question format and text availability on the assessment of expository text comprehension. Cognition and Instruction, 25(4), 399–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez, A., Joseph, H. S., Bajo, T., & Nation, K. (2016). Evaluation and revision of inferential comprehension in narrative texts: An eye movement study. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(4), 549–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pichert, J. W., & Anderson, R. C. (1977). Taking different perspectives on a story. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69(4), 309–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., Wharton-McDonald, R., Mistretta-Hampston, J., & Echevarria, M. (1998). Literacy instruction in 10 fourth-grade classrooms in upstate New York. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2(2), 159–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rickards, J. P. (1979). Adjunct postquestions in text: A critical review of methods and processes. Review of Educational Research, 49, 181–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rickards, J. P., & Di Vesta, F. J. (1974). Type and frequency of questions in processing textual material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66(3), 354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouet, J. F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouet, J.-F., & Britt, M. A. (2011). Relevance processes in multiple document comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 19–52). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouet, J. F., Britt, M. A., & Durik, A. M. (2017). RESOLV: Readers’ representation of reading contexts and tasks. Educational Psychologist, 52(3), 200–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouet, J. F., Vidal-Abarca, E., Erboul, A. B., & Millogo, V. (2001). Effects of information search tasks on the comprehension of instructional text. Discourse Processes, 31(2), 163–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubman, C., & Waters, H. (2000). A, B seeing: The role of constructive processes in children’s comprehension monitoring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 503–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schielzeth, H. (2010). Simple means to improve the interpretability of regression coefficients. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 1(2), 103–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serrano, M. Á., Vidal-Abarca, E., & Ferrer, A. (2018). Teaching self-regulation strategies via an intelligent tutoring system (TuinLECweb): Effects for low-skilled comprehenders. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 34(5), 515–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van den Broek, P., Bohn-Gettler, C. M., Kendeou, P., Carlson, S., & White, M. J. (2011). When a reader meets a text: The role of standards of coherence in reading comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 123–140). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Broek, P., Lorch, R. F., Linderholm, T., & Gustafson, M. (2001). The effects of readers’ goals on inference generation and memory for texts. Memory & Cognition, 29, 1081–1087.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van den Broek, P., Risden, K., & Husbye-Hartmann, E. (1995). The role of readers’ standards of coherence in the generation of inferences during reading. In R. F. Lorch Jr. & E. J. O’Brien (Eds.), Sources of coherence in text comprehension (pp. 353–373). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidal-Abarca, E., Gilabert, R., Ferrer, A., Ávila, V., Martínez, T., Mañá, A., et al. (2014). TuinLEC, an intelligent tutoring system to improve reading literacy skills/TuinLEC, un tutor inteligente para mejorar la competencia lectora. Infancia y Aprendizaje. Journal for the study of Education and Development, 37(1), 25–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidal-Abarca, E., Mañá, A., & Gil, L. (2010). Individual differences for self-regulating task-oriented reading activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 17–826.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidal-Abarca, E., Máñez, I. & Magliano, J. P. (2015) Effect of feedback and comprehension level on task-oriented reading: A think-aloud study. Paper presented at the meeting of the 25th annual meeting of the Society for Text and Discourse. Minneapolis.

  • Wijekumar, K. K., Meyer, B. J., & Lei, P. (2017). Web-based text structure strategy instruction improves seventh graders’ content area reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(6), 741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Funding was provided by Secretaría de Estado de Investigación, Desarrollo e Innovación (Grant No. EDU2014-55662-R).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ERI Lectura, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain

    R. Cerdán & E. Vidal-Abarca

  2. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    A. Pérez

  3. University of Poitiers, Poitiers, France

    J. F. Rouet

Authors
  1. R. Cerdán
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Pérez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. Vidal-Abarca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. F. Rouet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Cerdán.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cerdán, R., Pérez, A., Vidal-Abarca, E. et al. To answer questions from text, one has to understand what the question is asking: differential effects of question aids as a function of comprehension skill. Read Writ 32, 2111–2124 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09943-w

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09943-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation