Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 1997-1
Effects of Causal Structure on Immediate and Delayed Story Recall by Children with Mild Mental Retardation,Children with Learning Disabilities,and Children without Disabilities
Children with mild mental retardation, children with learning disabilities, and children without disabilities read and recalled a story immediately and after a delay of 4 or 5 days. The effects of the story's causal structure on recall were compared for the three groups. Although children with mild mental retardation recalled less than the other groups, the effects of causal structure were similar across the three groups. At both retention intervals, all groups recalled content better if it was on the story's causal chain than if it was off the causal chain, and statements with many causal connections better than statements with few causal connections. All groups were sensitive to the causal structure of the story. The only notable difference was that the children with mild retardation forgot content on the causal chain somewhat faster than content off the causal chain, whereas the other two groups showed the reverse pattern.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Black, J. B., & Bower, G. H. (1980). Story understanding as problem solving. Poetics, 9, 223–250.
2.
Bos, C. S., & Tierney, R. J. (1984). Inferential reading abilities of mildly mentally retarded and nonretarded students. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 89, 75–82.
3.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219–232.
4.
Deno, S. L., & Fuchs, L. S. (1987). Developing curriculum-based measurement systems for data-based special education problem-solving. Focus on Exceptional Children, 19, 1–16.
5.
Deno, S. L., Mirkin, P. K. & Chiang, B. (1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional Children, 44, 36–45.
6.
Dulaney, C. L., & Ellis, N. R. (1991). Long-term recognition memory for items and attributes by retarded and nonretarded persons. Intelligence, 15, 105–115.
7.
Fletcher, C. R., & Bloom, C. P. (1988). Causal reasoning in the comprehension of simple narrative texts. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 235–244.
8.
Fry, E. (1968). A readability formula that saves time. Journal of Reading, 11, 513–516.
9.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D. & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension measures. Remedial and Special Education, 9(2), 20–29.
10.
Glidden, L. M., & Warner, D. A. (1983). Semantic processing and recall improvement of EMR adolescents. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 88, 96–105.
11.
Goldman, S. R., & Varnhagen, C. K. (1986). Memory for embedded and sequential story structures. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 401–418.
12.
Graesser, A. C., & Clark, L. F. (1985). The structures and procedures of implicit knowledge.New York: Springer-Verlag.
13.
Graybeal, C. M. (1981). Memory for stories in language-impaired children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 2, 269–283.
14.
Hansen, C. L. (1978). Story retelling used with average and learning disabled readers as a measure of reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1, 62–69.
15.
Lorch, R. F., Jr., & Lorch, E. P. (1995). Effects of organizational signals on text-processing strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 537–544.
16.
Lorch, R. F., Jr., & Myers, J. L. (1990). Regression analyses of repeated measures data in cognitive research: A comparison of three different methods. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 16, 149–157.
17.
Luftig, R. L., & Greeson, L. E. (1983). Effects of structural importance and idea saliency on discourse recall of mentally retarded and nonretarded pupils. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 87, 414–421.
18.
MacLachlin, B. G., & Chapman, R. S. (1988). Communication breakdown in normal and language learning disabled children's conversation and narration. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 53, 2–7.
19.
Marston, D., & Magnusson, D. (1988). Curriculum-based measurement: District level implementation. In J. Graden, J. Zins., & M. Curtis (Eds.), Alternative educational delivery systems: Enhancing instructional options for all students (pp. 137–172). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
20.
McCartney, J. R. (1987). Mentally retarded and nonretarded subjects' long-term recognition memory. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 92, 312–317.
21.
McConaughy, S. H. (1985). Good and poor readers' comprehension of story structure across different input. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 219–232.
22.
Omanson, R. C. (1982). An analysis of narratives: Identifying central, supportive, and distracting content. Discourse Processes, 5, 195–224.
23.
Ripich, D. N., & Griffith, P. L. (1988). Narrative abilities of children with learning disabilities and nondisabled children: Story structure, cohesion, and propositions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 165–173.
24.
Schank, R. C. (1975). The structure of episodes in memory. In D. G. Bobrow & A. Collins (Eds.), Representation and understanding (pp. 237–272). New York: Academic Press.
25.
Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
26.
Trabasso, T., Secco, T. & van den Broek, P. (1984). Causal cohesion and story coherence. In H. Mandl, N. Stein, & T. Trabasso (Eds.), Learning and comprehension of text (pp. 83–111). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
27.
Trabasso T., & Sperry, L. (1985). Causal relatedness and importance of story events. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 595–611.
28.
Trabasso, T., & van den Broek, P. (1985). Causal thinking and the representation of narrative events. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 612–630.
29.
Turnure, J. (1991). Long term memory and mental retardation. In N. W. Bray (Ed.), International review of research in mental retardation (Vol. 17, pp. 193–216). New York: Academic Press.
30.
Van den Broek, P. (1988). The effects of causal relations and hierarchical position on the importance of story statements. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 1–22.
31.
Van den Broek, P. W. (1989). The effects of causal structure on the comprehension of narratives: Implications for education. Reading Psychology: An International Quarterly, 10, 19–44.
32.
Van den Broek, P. W. (1990). The causal inference maker: Towards a process model of inference generation in text comprehension. In D. Balota, G. Flores d'Arcais, & K. Rayner (Eds.), Comprehension processes in reading (pp. 423–446). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
33.
Weaver, P. A., & Dickinson, D. K. (1982). Scratching below the surface structure: Exploring the usefulness of story grammars. Discourse Processes, 5, 225–243.
34.
Wechsler, D. (1974). Manual for the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised.San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
35.
Wolman, C. (1991). Sensitivity to causal cohesion in stories by children with mild mental retardation, children with learning disabilities, and children without disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 25, 135–154.
