J Exp Psychol Gen. 2016 Jul;145(7):881. doi: 10.1037/xge0000186.
Reports an error in "Interruptions disrupt reading comprehension" by Cyrus K. Foroughi, Nicole E. Werner, Daniela Barragán and Deborah A. Boehm-Davis (Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2015[Jun], Vol 144[3], 704-709). In the article the effect sizes (Cohen's d) were reported using the incorrect formula. The correct formula and effect sizes are provided. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2015-15250-001.) Previous research suggests that being interrupted while reading a text does not disrupt the later recognition or recall of information from that text. This research is used as support for Ericsson and Kintsch's (1995) long-term working memory (LT-WM) theory, which posits that disruptions while reading (e.g., interruptions) do not impair subsequent text comprehension. However, to fully comprehend a text, individuals may need to do more than recognize or recall information that has been presented in the text at a later time. Reading comprehension often requires individuals to connect and synthesize information across a text (e.g., successfully identifying complex topics such as themes and tones) and not just make a familiarity-based decision (i.e., recognition). The goal for this study was to determine whether interruptions while reading disrupt reading comprehension when the questions assessing comprehension require participants to connect and synthesize information across the passage. In Experiment 1, interruptions disrupted reading comprehension. In Experiment 2, interruptions disrupted reading comprehension but not recognition of information from the text. In Experiment 3, the addition of a 15-s time-out prior to the interruption successfully removed these negative effects. These data suggest that the time it takes to process the information needed to successfully comprehend text when reading is greater than that required for recognition. Any interference (e.g., an interruption) that occurs during the comprehension process may disrupt reading comprehension. This evidence supports the need for transient activation of information in working memory for successful text comprehension and does not support LT-WM theory. (PsycINFO Database Record
报告赛勒斯·K·福鲁吉、妮可·E·沃纳、丹妮拉·巴拉甘和黛博拉·A·博姆 - 戴维斯所著的《干扰会破坏阅读理解》(《实验心理学杂志:总论》,2015年[6月],第144卷[3],704 - 709页)中的一处错误。在该文章中,效应量(科恩d值)是使用错误公式报告的。现提供正确公式及效应量。(以下是原始文章的摘要,出现在记录2015 - 15250 - 001中。)先前的研究表明,阅读文本时被打断并不会破坏对该文本信息的后续识别或回忆。这项研究被用作对埃里克森和金茨(1995)长期工作记忆(LT - WM)理论的支持,该理论假定阅读时的干扰(如打断)不会损害后续的文本理解。然而,为了充分理解一篇文本,个体可能需要做的不仅仅是识别或回忆文本中稍后呈现的信息。阅读理解通常要求个体在整个文本中连接和综合信息(例如,成功识别复杂的主题,如主题和语气),而不仅仅是做出基于熟悉度的判断(即识别)。本研究的目的是确定当评估理解的问题要求参与者在整个段落中连接和综合信息时,阅读时的干扰是否会破坏阅读理解。在实验1中,干扰破坏了阅读理解。在实验2中,干扰破坏了阅读理解,但没有破坏对文本信息的识别。在实验3中,在干扰前增加15秒的暂停成功消除了这些负面影响。这些数据表明,阅读时成功理解文本所需处理信息的时间比识别所需的时间更长。理解过程中发生的任何干扰(如打断)都可能破坏阅读理解。这一证据支持了工作记忆中信息的短暂激活对于成功文本理解的必要性,并不支持长期工作记忆理论。(PsycINFO数据库记录