Albertini John A, Marschark Marc, Kincheloe Pamela J
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rochester Institute of Technology.
J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2016 Jul;21(3):303-9. doi: 10.1093/deafed/env052. Epub 2015 Nov 10.
Research in discourse reveals numerous cognitive connections between reading and writing. Rather than one being the inverse of the other, there are parallels and interactions between them. To understand the variables and possible connections in the reading and writing of adult deaf students, we manipulated writing conditions and reading texts. First, to test the hypothesis that a fluent writing process leads to richer content and a higher degree of coherence in a written summary, we interrupted the writing process with verbal and nonverbal intervening tasks. The negligible effect of the interference indicated that the stimuli texts were not equivalent in terms of coherence and revealed a relationship between coherence of the stimuli texts, amount of content recalled, and coherence of the written summaries. To test for a possible effect of coherence on reading comprehension, we manipulated the coherence of the texts. We found that students understood the more coherent versions of the passages better than the less coherent versions and were able to accurately distinguish between them. However, they were not able to judge comprehensibility. Implications for further research and classroom application are discussed.
话语研究揭示了阅读与写作之间众多的认知联系。它们并非彼此相反，而是存在着平行关系和相互作用。为了理解成年聋生阅读与写作中的变量及可能的联系，我们对写作条件和阅读文本进行了操控。首先，为了检验流畅的写作过程会使书面总结内容更丰富、连贯性更高这一假设，我们用言语和非言语干扰任务打断写作过程。干扰产生的可忽略不计的影响表明，刺激文本在连贯性方面并不等同，并且揭示了刺激文本的连贯性、回忆的内容量与书面总结的连贯性之间的关系。为了测试连贯性对阅读理解可能产生的影响，我们操控了文本的连贯性。我们发现，学生对连贯性更强的段落版本理解得比对连贯性较差的版本更好，并且能够准确区分它们。然而，他们无法判断其可理解性。本文还讨论了对进一步研究和课堂应用的启示。
