Haberlandt K F, Graesser A C, Schneider N J
Department of Psychology, Trinity College, Hartford, Connecticut 06106.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1989 Sep;15(5):815-23. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.15.5.815.
In three subject-paced experiments we evaluated reading patterns at the word, line, and sentence level for fast and slow readers. A moving-window method was used to collect word reading times for natural texts. At the word level, reading times of word N were influenced by features of word N-1 for fast readers but not for slow readers. The lag effect exhibited by fast readers indicates that they continue to process a word when it is no longer in view, thus limiting the notion of immediate processing. Contrary to our initial expectation that fast readers would process only a single new argument from a sentence, whereas slow readers would process several new arguments, we found that both reader groups adopted a many-argument strategy. However, fast and slow readers differed in terms of the text units (lines vs. sentences) defining the new-argument effects: Fast readers exhibited greater new-argument effects relative to lines, whereas slow readers exhibited greater new-argument effects relative to sentences. Specifically, slow readers integrated the new arguments primarily at the end of the sentence, whereas fast readers did so at line boundaries. These results are discussed in terms of a buffer-and-integrate model of reading comprehension.
在三项以受试者为导向的实验中,我们评估了快速阅读者和慢速阅读者在单词、行和句子层面的阅读模式。采用移动窗口法收集自然文本的单词阅读时间。在单词层面,对于快速阅读者,单词N的阅读时间受单词N - 1特征的影响,而对于慢速阅读者则不然。快速阅读者表现出的滞后效应表明,当一个单词不再在视野中时,他们仍在继续处理它,从而限制了即时处理的概念。与我们最初的预期相反,即快速阅读者只会处理句子中的一个新论点,而慢速阅读者会处理几个新论点,我们发现两组阅读者都采用了多论点策略。然而,快速阅读者和慢速阅读者在定义新论点效应的文本单元(行与句子)方面存在差异:相对于行,快速阅读者表现出更大的新论点效应,而相对于句子,慢速阅读者表现出更大的新论点效应。具体而言,慢速阅读者主要在句子末尾整合新论点,而快速阅读者则在行边界处进行整合。我们根据阅读理解的缓冲与整合模型对这些结果进行了讨论。