Suppr超能文献

阅读会让你更聪明吗?读写能力与语言智力的发展。

Does reading make you smarter? Literacy and the development of verbal intelligence.

作者信息

Stanovich K E

机构信息

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Toronto, Canada.

出版信息

Adv Child Dev Behav. 1993;24:133-80. doi: 10.1016/s0065-2407(08)60302-x.

Abstract

The studies reported here represent the first steps in the development of a new research paradigm for studying the unique cognitive correlates of literacy. Reading experience exhibits enough isolable variance within a generally literate society to be reliably linked with cognitive differences. Research on such links is therefore facilitated because the consequences of engaging in literacy activities can be studied without necessarily obtaining totally illiterate samples or setting up cross-cultural comparisons. Issues that are at least analogous issues to those raised in cross-cultural research can be studied within literate societies with a paradigm such as this, and therefore the speed with which we can answer questions about the cognitive consequences of literacy may be greatly increased because more studies can be carried out, larger samples can be studied, and the range of the cognitive domains tapped can be widened. Research in this area appears to have been stifled because of the widespread acceptance of the most extreme interpretations of the outcome of Scribner and Cole's (1981) investigation--interpretations that have slowly diffused throughout the literature without being accompanied by any new data. These conclusions are fueled by a powerful social critique that advances the argument that the positive cultural and economic effects of literacy have been overstated--indeed, that literacy is, if anything, a repressive force (Auerbach, 1992; Street, 1984, 1988; Stuckey, 1991). Educational theorists such as Frank Smith accused the educational establishment of "overselling" literacy and have argued that "Literacy doesn't generate finer feelings or higher values. It doesn't even make anyone smarter" (1989, p. 354). The data reported herein appear to indicate that these theorists could well be wrong in this conclusion. If "smarter" means having a larger vocabulary and more world knowledge in addition to the abstract reasoning skills encompassed within the concept of intelligence, as it does in most laymen's definitions of intelligence (Stanovich, 1989; Sternberg, 1990), then reading may well make people smarter. Certainly our data demonstrate time and again that print exposure is associated with vocabulary, general knowledge, and verbal skills even after controlling for abstract reasoning abilities (as measured by such indicators as the Raven).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

摘要

本文所报告的研究代表了一种新研究范式发展的第一步,该范式用于研究读写能力独特的认知关联。在普遍有读写能力的社会中,阅读体验展现出了足够多可分离的差异,从而能够可靠地与认知差异相联系。因此,此类关联的研究变得更加便利,因为研究读写活动的影响时,不一定需要获取完全不识字的样本或进行跨文化比较。通过这样一种范式,可以在有读写能力的社会中研究至少与跨文化研究中提出的问题类似的问题。因此,我们回答有关读写能力认知影响问题的速度可能会大大提高,因为可以开展更多研究、研究更大的样本,并且可以拓宽所涉及的认知领域范围。由于人们广泛接受了对斯克里布纳和科尔(1981年)研究结果的最极端解释,该领域的研究似乎受到了阻碍,这些解释在文献中慢慢传播,却没有伴随任何新的数据。这些结论因一种有力的社会批评而得到强化,这种批评提出论点,即读写能力的积极文化和经济影响被夸大了——实际上,读写能力如果有什么作用的话,反而是一种压抑力量(奥尔巴赫,1992年;斯特里特,1984年、1988年;斯塔基,1991年)。像弗兰克·史密斯这样的教育理论家指责教育机构“过度推销”读写能力,并认为“读写能力不会产生更美好的情感或更高的价值观。它甚至不会让人更聪明”(1989年,第354页)。本文所报告的数据似乎表明,这些理论家在这个结论上很可能是错误的。如果“更聪明”意味着除了智力概念中包含的抽象推理能力外,还拥有更大的词汇量和更多的世界知识,就像大多数外行人对智力的定义那样(斯坦诺维奇,1989年;斯滕伯格,1990年),那么阅读很可能会让人更聪明。当然,我们的数据一再表明,即使在控制了抽象推理能力(如通过瑞文测试等指标衡量)之后,接触印刷品也与词汇量、常识和语言技能相关。(摘要截选至400字)

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验