The experiment addressed the issue of what makes information important. The effects of three factors — category membership, normative relative importance, and goal-relatedness — were examined. Since these factors are difficult to isolate in existing schemas and categories, training materials were used to create a new schema for a fictitious insect family. The results indicated that all three factors were influencing the perceived importance of information to some extent. However, normative relative importance appeared to influence a writing task more strongly than a rating task.
References
1.
AndersonB. F. (1975). Cognitive psychology: The study of knowing, learning, and thinking. New York: Academic Press.
2.
AndersonR. C.ReynoldsR. E.SchallertD. L.GoetzE. T. (1977). Frameworks for comprehending discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 14, 367–382.
3.
BartlettB. J. (1978). Top-level structure as an organizational strategy for recall of classroom text (Research Rep. No. 1). Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University.
4.
BartlettF. C. (1932). Remembering. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
5.
BrownA. L.CampioneJ. C.DayJ. D. (1981). Learning to learn: On training students to learn from text. Educational Researcher, 10, 14–21.
6.
BrownA. L.SmileyS. S. (1977). Rating the importance of structural units of prose passages: A problem of metacognitive development. Child Development, 48, 1–8.
7.
EamonD. B. (1978–1979). Selection and recall of topical information in prose by better and poorer readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 244–257.
8.
GoetzE. T.ArmbrusterB. B. (1980). Psychological correlates of text structure. In SpiroR. J.BruceB. C.BrewerW. F. (Eds.), Theoretical Issues in Reading Comprehension (pp. 201–220). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9.
GomulickiB. R. (1956). Recall as an abstractive process. Acta Psychologica, 12, 77–94.
10.
GordonC. J. (1980). The effects of instruction in metacomprehension and inferencing on children's comprehension abilities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
11.
HagenJ. W. (1967). The effect of distraction on selective attention. Child Development, 38, 685–694.
12.
JohnsonR. E. (1970). Recall of prose as a function of the structural importance of the linguistic unit. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 12–20.
13.
JohnsonR. E. (1974). Abstractive processes in the remembering of prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 722–729.
14.
KierasD. E. (1978). Good and bad structure in simple paragraphs: Effects on apparent theme, reading time and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 13–28.
15.
KierasD. E. (1980). Initial mention as a signal to thematic content in technical passages. Memory and Cognition, 8, 345–353.
16.
KintschW.van DijkT. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363–394.
17.
LipsonM. Y. (1983). The influence of religious affiliation on children's memory for text information. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 448–457.
18.
LuftigR. L. (1983). Abstractive memory, the central-incidental hypothesis, and the use of structural importance in text: Control processes on structural features. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 28–37.
19.
LuftigR. E.JohnsonR. E. (1982). Identification and recall of structurally important units in prose of mentally retarded learners. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 86, 495–502.
20.
MeyerB. J. (1975). The organization of prose and its effects on memory. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.
21.
MeyerB. J.BrandtD. M.BluthG. (1980). Use of top-level structure in text: Key for reading comprehension of ninth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 72–103.
22.
PichertJ. N. (1979). Sensitivity to what is important in prose (Tech. Rep. No. 149). Urbana: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading (Ed 179 046).
23.
RollerC. M. (1984, November). Importance of information: Reader- or text-based phenomenon. Paper presented at the National Reading Conference, St. Petersburg Beach, FL.
24.
RollerC. M. (in press). The effects of reader- and text-based factors on writers' and readers' perceptions of the importance of information in expository prose. Reading Research Quarterly.
25.
RumelhartD. W. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In DornicS. (Ed.), Attention and performance VI, 573–603. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26.
SingerH.DonlanD. (1982). Active comprehension: Problem-solving schema with question generation for comprehension of complex short stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 166–186.
27.
SteffensenM. S.Joag-DevC.AndersonR. C. (1979). A cross-cultural perspective on reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 15, 10–20.
28.
TaylorB. M. (1982). Text structure and children's comprehension and memory for expository material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 323–340.
29.
ThibadeauR.JustM. A.CarpenterP. A. (1982). A model of the time course and content of reading. Cognitive Science, 6, 157–203.
30.
ThorndykeP. W. (1977). Cognitive structures in comprehension and memory of narrative discourse. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 77–110.
31.
WilsonC. R. (1979). The effects of close textual analysis on sixth-grade students' ability to produce a gist or summary statement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
