Department of Psychology, 4446Cameron University, Lawton, OK, USA.
School of Pharmacy, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA.
Psychol Rep. 2021 Aug;124(4):1621-1633. doi: 10.1177/0033294120942915. Epub 2020 Jul 22.
The present study examined how the structure of procedural texts affected recall of those texts. Past research has found that procedural text is comprehended best when readers expend a moderate amount of effort in processing it; the amount of effort may depend on the structure of the procedural text. Sixty-three participants read six procedural texts describing how to construct simple machines. One group of participants read texts that contained a diagram of the object, whereas the other group read texts with no diagram. Two types of texts were presented: Narrative and list-like procedural texts. Results showed that rereading increased recall of the list-like text, but had little effect for the narrative text. The elaboration hypothesis explains the recall differences after a single reading, but it is still unclear why the list-like texts were recalled better than the narrative texts after a second reading.
本研究考察了程序性文本的结构如何影响对这些文本的回忆。过去的研究发现，当读者在处理程序性文本时付出适度的努力时，他们对该文本的理解最佳；这种努力的程度可能取决于程序性文本的结构。63 名参与者阅读了六篇描述如何构建简单机器的程序性文本。一组参与者阅读了包含对象图的文本，而另一组则阅读了没有图表的文本。呈现了两种类型的文本：叙述性和列表式程序性文本。结果表明，重读会增加对列表式文本的回忆，但对叙述性文本的影响很小。细化假说解释了单次阅读后的回忆差异，但仍不清楚为什么在第二次阅读后，列表式文本的回忆比叙述性文本更好。
