This investigation explored the effects of question task conditions on reading comprehension and metacomprehension for subjects differing in reading ability and English language proficiency. Proficient readers, disabled readers, and deaf readers read expository passages and completed selected-response and constructed-response question tasks under both lookback and no-lookback conditions. In addition, subjects rated their perceived comprehension adequacy both after reading each passage and after responding to the questions. Several significant interaction effects were found for both demonstrated and perceived comprehension performance, most notably with lookback tasks. However, overlaps between comprehension and metacomprehension processes were not comparable across reader groups. Implications are drawn for further research concerning interactions of individual differences with reading comprehension tasks.
References
1.
AckermanP. T.DykmanR. A. (1982). Automatic and effortful information-processing deficits in children with learning and attention disorders. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 2, 12–22.
2.
BensonJ.CrockerL. (1979). The effects of item format and reading ability on objective test performance: A question of validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 39, 381–387.
3.
BlairF. X. (1957). A study of the visual memory of deaf and hearing children. American Annals of the Deaf, 102, 254–263.
4.
BransfordJ. D.SteinB. S.VyeN. J. (1982). Helping students learn how to learn from written texts. In SingerM. H. (Ed.), Competent reader, disabled reader: Research and application (pp. 141–150). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5.
BrownA. L.BransfordJ. D.FerraraR. A.CampioneJ. C. (1982). Learning, remembering, and understanding (Tech. Rep. No. 244). Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading.
6.
CarrollJ. B. (1972). Defining language comprehension: Some speculations. In FreedleR. O.CarrollJ. B. (Eds.), Language comprehension and the acquisition of knowledge. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
7.
CarverR. P. (1973). Reading as reasoning: Implications for measurement. In MacGinitieW. (Ed.), Assessment problems in reading (pp. 44–56). Newark, DE.: International Reading Association.
8.
ConleyJ. (1976). The role of idiomatic expressions in the reading of deaf children. American Annals of the Deaf, 12, 381–385.
9.
ConradR. (1979). The deaf school child: Language and cognitive function. London: Harper & Row.
10.
CooperR. (1967). The ability of deaf and hearing children to apply morphological rules. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 10, 77–86.
11.
CurtisM. (1980). Development of components of reading skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 656–669.
12.
DaleE.ChallJ. (1948). A formula for predicting readability. Educational Research Bulletin, 27, 11–20, 37–54.
13.
DallagoM. L.MoelyB. E. (1980). Free recall in boys of normal and poor reading levels as a function of task manipulations. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 30, 62–78.
14.
DanemanM.CarpenterP. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–466.
15.
DaveyB.LaSassoC. (1985). Relations of cognitive style to assessment components of reading comprehension for deaf adolescents. The Volta Review, 87, 17–27.
16.
DiFrancescaS. (1972). Academic achievement test results of a national testing program for hearing impaired students. Washington, DC: Gallaudet College, Office of Demographic Studies.
17.
DoehringD.HoshkoI. (1977). Classifications of reading problems by the Q-technique of factor analysis. Cortex, 13, 281–294.
18.
DurkinD. (1978–1979). What classroom observations reveal about reading comprehension instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, XIV, 481–533.
19.
FeagansL.ApplebaumM. (1986). Validation of language subtypes in learning disabled children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 358–364.
20.
FryE. (1977). A readability formula that saves time. In HarkerJ. (Ed.), Classroom strategies for secondary reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
21.
GarnerR.ReisR. (1981). Monitoring and resolving comprehension obstacles: An investigation of spontaneous text lookbacks among upper-grade good and poor comprehenders. Reading Research Quarterly, XIV, 569–582.
22.
GarnerR.MacreadyG.WagonerS. (1984). Readers' acquisition of the components of the text lookback strategy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 300–309.
23.
GibsonE. J.LevinH. (1975). The psychology of reading. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24.
GavelekJ. R.RaphaelT. E. (1982). Instructing metacognitive awareness of question-answer relationships: Implications for the learning disabled. Topics in Learning & Learning Disabilities, 2, 69–72.
25.
GavelekJ. R.RaphaelT. E. (1985). Metacognition, instruction, and the role of questioning activities. In Forrest-PressleyD.MacKinnonG.WallerT. G. (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition and human performance (Vol. 2, pp. 103–136). New York: Academic Press.
26.
HansonV. L. (1982). Short-term recall by deaf signers of American sign language: Implications for order recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 8, 572–583.
27.
HarrisA. J.SipayE. R. (1985). How to increase reading ability. New York: Longman.
28.
HessA. M. (1982). An analysis of the cognitive processes underlying problems in reading comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, XIV, 313–333.
29.
HessT. M.RadtkeR.C. (1981). Processing and memory factors in children's reading comprehension skill. Child Development, 52, 479–488.
30.
HicksC.SpurgeonP. (1982). Two factor analytic studies of dyslexic subtypes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 52, 289–300.
31.
JohnstonP. H. (1983). Reading comprehension assessment: A cognitive basis. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
32.
KaganJ. (1983). Retrieval difficulty in reading disability. Topics in Learning & Learning Disabilities, 3, 73–83.
33.
KendallJ. R.MasonJ. M.HunterW. (1980). Which comprehension? Artifacts in the measurement of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Research, 73, 233–236.
34.
KeoghB. K.MargolisJ. (1976). Learn to labor and to wait: Attention problems of children with learning disorders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 9, 276–282.
35.
KingC. M.QuigleyS. P. (1985). Reading and deafness. San Diego, CA: College Hill Press.
36.
KleimanG. M. (1982). Comparing good and poor readers: A critique of the research (Tech. Rep. No. 246). Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading.
37.
KyleJ. G. (1980). Reading development of deaf children. Journal of Research in Reading, 3, 86–97.
38.
LaBergeD.SamuelsS. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323.
39.
LaSassoC. (1979). The effect of WH question format versus incomplete statement format on deaf subjects'demonstration of comprehension of text-explicit information. American Annals of the Deaf, 124, 833–837.
40.
LaSassoC. (1985). Visual matching test-taking strategies of deaf readers. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 28, 2–7.
41.
LaSassoC. (1986). A comparison of visual matching test-taking strategies of comparably-aged normal-hearing, and hearing-impaired subjects with comparable reading levels. The Volta Review, 88, 231–241.
42.
LichtensteinE. H. (1985). Deaf working memory processes and English language skills. In MartinD. (Ed.), Cognition, education, and deafness (pp. 111–114). Washington, DC: Gallaudet College Press.
43.
LichtensteinE.H. (in press). The relationships between reading processes and English skills of deaf college students: Parts I and II. Applied Psycholinguistics.
44.
McCallW.CrabbsL. (1961). Standard test lessons in reading. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College Press.
45.
McKeeB.LangH. G. (1982). A comparison of deaf students' performance on true-false and multiple-choice items. American Annals of the Deaf, 127, 49–54.
46.
MooresD. (1967). Applications of the “cloze” procedures to the assessment of psycholinguistic abilities of the deaf. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois.
47.
MyersM.ParisS. G. (1978). Children's metacognitive knowledge about reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 680–690.
48.
PerfettiC.A. (1983). Individual differences in verbal processes. In DillonR. F.SchmeckR. R. (Eds.), Individual differences in cognition (Vol. 1, pp. 65–104). New York: Academic Press.
49.
PerfettiC. A.LesgoldA. M. (1977). Discourse comprehension and sources of individual differences. In JustM. A.CarpenterP. A. (Eds.), Cognitive processes in comprehension (pp. 141–184). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
50.
PetrauskasR.RourkeB. (1979). Identification of subgroups of retarded readers: A neuropsychological multivariate approach. Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology, 1, 17–37.
51.
PowerD.QuigleyS. (1973). Deaf children's acquisition of passive voice. The Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 16, 5–11.
52.
PyrczakF. (1975–1976). A responsive note on measures of the passage dependence of reading comprehension test items. Reading Research Quarterly, XI, 112–117.
53.
QuigleyS.PaulP. (1984). Language and deafness. San Diego, CA: College Hill Press.
54.
QuigleyS.SmithN.WilburR. (1974). Comprehension of relativized sentences by deaf students. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 17, 325–341.
55.
QuigleyS.WilburR.MontanelliD. (1974). Development of question formation in the written language of deaf students. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 17, 699–713.
56.
QuigleyS. P.WilburR. B.PowerD. J.MontanelliD. S.SteinkampM. W. (1976). Syntactic structures in the language of deaf children. Champaign, IL: Institute for Child Behavior and Development.
57.
RaphaelT. E.MeyersA. C.TirreW. C.FreebodyP.FritzM. (1981). The effects of some known sources of reading difficulty on metacomprehension and comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, XII, 325–335.
58.
RobbinsN.HatcherC. (1981). The effects of syntax on the reading comprehension of hearing-impaired children. The Volta Review, 83, 105–115.
59.
RudnerL. (1978). Using standard tests with the hearing impaired: The problem of item bias. The Volta Review, 80, 31–40.
60.
RussellW.QuigleyS.PowerD. (1976). Linguistics and deaf children. Washington, DC: Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf, Inc.
61.
SamuelsS. J. (1973). Success and failure in learning to read: A critique of the research. Reading Research Quarterly, VIII, 200–239.
62.
SatzP.MorrisR. (1981). Learning disability subtypes: A review. In PirozzoloF. J.WittrockM. C. (Eds.), Neuropsychological and cognitive processes in reading (pp. 109–141). New York: Academic Press.
63.
ScholesR.CohenM.ShannonB. (1978). Some possible causes of syntactic deficits in the congenitally deaf English user. American Annals of the Deaf, 123, 528–535.
64.
ShanahanT. (1980). Three explanations of reading disability. In KamilM. L.MoeA. J. (Eds.), Perspectives on reading research and instruction. Twenty-ninth Yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 301–308).Washington, DC: The National Reading Conference.
65.
ShankweilerD.LibermanI. Y.MarkL. S.FowlerC. A.FischerF. W. (1979). The speech code and learning to read. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 5, 531–545.
66.
StanovichK. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, XXI, 360–407.
67.
SternbergR. J.WagnerR. K. (1982). Automatization failure in learning disabilities. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 2, 1–11.
68.
TorgesenJ. K. (1978). Performance of reading disabled children in serial memory tasks: A review. Reading Research Quarterly, XIX, 57–87.
69.
TorgesenJ. K. (1980). The use of efficient task strategies by learning disabled children: Conceptual and educational implications. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 13, 364–371.
70.
TorgesenJ. K. (1982). The study of short-term memory in learning disabled children: Goals, methods, and conclusions. In GadowK.BialerI. (Eds.), Advances in learning and behavior disabilities. Greenwich, CN: JAI Press.
71.
TraubR. E.FisherC. W. (1977). On the equivalence of constructed-response and multiple-choice tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 355–369.
72.
TrybusR. J.KarchmerM. A. (1977). National data on achievement status and growth patterns. American Annals of the Deaf, 122, 62–69.
73.
TuinmanJ. J. (1979). Reading is recognition—When reading is not reasoning. In HarsteJ. C.CareyR. F. (Eds.), Monograph in language and reading studies: New perspectives on comprehension (pp. 38–48).
74.
WalterG. (1978). Lexical abilities of hearing and hearing-impaired children. American Annals of the Deaf, 123, 976–982.
75.
WardW. (1982). A comparison of free-response and multiple-choice forms of verbal aptitude tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 1–11.
76.
WilburR.GoodhartW.MontandonE. (1983). Comprehension of nine syntactic structures. The Volta Review, 82, 328–344.
77.
WilburR.QuigleyS.MontanelliD. (1975). Conjoined structures in the language of deaf students. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 18, 319–335.
78.
WilsonK.KarchmerM.GensemaC. (1978). Literal versus inferential item analysis of reading achievement in hearing impaired students. In ReynoldsH. (Ed.), Gallaudet Conference on Reading in Relation to Deafness. Washington, DC: Gallaudet College Press.
79.
WixsonK. K. (1983). Postreading question-answer interactions and children's learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 30, 413–423.
80.
WongB. Y. L.WongR.LeMareL. J. (1982). The effects of knowledge of criterion tasks on the comprehension and recall of normally-achieving and learning-disabled children. Journal of Educational Research, 76, 119–126.
81.
WoodD. J.GriffithsA. J.WebsterA. (1981). Reading retardation or linguistic deficit? II: Text-answering strategies in hearing and hearing-impaired school children. Journal of Research in Reading, 4, 148–156.
