Gist identification or coherent situation model construction performance is an important criterion not only in L1 and L2 reading comprehension assessment but also in every aspect of discourse processing. Whereas most previous L2 research has investigated schematic knowledge of readers about relations within a text, more recent studies have used models of comprehension that also pay attention to external reference and world knowledge. The present study proposes a way to assess gist identification by L2 readers using Hoey's (1991) theory of networks of repetition of lexical items including morphologically similar words and paraphrases of keywords containing the gist of a text. Based on Hoey's tax-onomy, two models were tested. One, following Kintsch (e.g. 1998), assessed the ability to identify the gist of a text using minimal lookbacks. The other encouraged multiple lookbacks. The second model, which involved more reader involvement in finding referential relationships within a text, resulted in more detailed understanding of gist.
Anderson, N.J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 460-472.
2.
Anderson, R.C. & Pearson, D.P. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading. In D. P. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 255-291). New York: Longman.
3.
Anderson, R.C. (1972). How to construct achievement tests to assess comprehension . Review of Educational Research, 42(2), 145-170.
4.
Barry, S. & Lazarte, A.A. (1998). Evidence for mental models: How do prior knowledge, syntactic complexity, and reading topic affect inference generation in recall task for nonnative readers of Spanish?Modern Language Journal , 82(2), 176-193.
5.
Barsalou, L.W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(4), 577-660.
6.
Bernard, J.R.A. (1990). The Macquarie encyclopedic thesaurus: The book of words. Melbourne: Macquarie Library .
7.
Bourassa, D.C., Levy, B.A., Dowin, S., & Casey, A. (1998). Transfer effects across contextual and linguistic boundaries: Evidence from poor readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 71, 45-61.
8.
Buck, G., Tatsuoka, K. & Kostin, I. (1997). The subskills of reading: Rule-space analysis of a multiple-choice test of second language reading comprehension. Language Learning, 47(3), 423-466.
9.
Carrell, P.L. (1985). Facilitating ESL reading by teaching text structure . TESOL Quarterly, 19(4), 727-752.
10.
Carver, R.P. (2000). The causes of high and low reading achievement . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum .
11.
Chan, Y. (2006). On the use of the immediate recall task as a measure of second language reading comprehension Language Testing, 23(4), 520-543. Connor , U. (1984). Recall of text: Differences between first and second language readers. TESOL Quarterly, 18(2), 239-256.
12.
Cziko, G.A. (1980). Language competence an reading strategies: A comparison of first- and second-language oral reading errors. Language Learning, 30(1), 101-114..
13.
Dell, G.S., McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1983) The activation of antecedent information during the processing of anaphoric reference in reading. Journal of Verbal Language and Verbal Behavior, 22(1), 121-132.
14.
Demel, M.C. (1990). The relationship between overall reading comprehension and comprehension of coreferential ties for second language readers of English . TESOL Quarterly, 24(2), 267-292.
15.
Ehrlich, K., & Rayner, K. (1983). Pronoun assignment and semantic integration during reading: Eye movements and immediacy of processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22(1), 75-87.
16.
Enright, M.K., Grabe,W., Koda, K., Mosenthal, P., Mulcahy-Ernt, P., & Schedl, M.2000: TOEFL 2000 Reading framework: A working paper (TOEFL Monograph Series MS-17). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
17.
Fitzgerald, J. (1995). English-as-a-second-language learners' cognitive reading processes: A review of research in the United States. Review of Educational Research, 65(2), 89-108.
18.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2001). January 30: HIV/AIDS devastating rural labour force in many African countries, says FAO. Retrieved February 2008, from http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/OIS/PRESS_NE/PRESSENG/2001/pren0130.htm
19.
Glenberg, A.M., & Kaschak, M.P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(3), 558-565.
Graesser, A.C., Bowers, C., Bayen, U.J., & Hu, X. (1997) Who said what? Who knows what? Tracking speakers and knowledge in narratives. In W. Van Peer & S. Chatman (Eds.), New perspectives on narrative perspective (pp. 258-272). NY: State University of New York Press.
Hasan, R. (1984). Coherence and cohesive harmony. In J. Flood (Ed.), Understanding reading comprehension (pp. 181-219). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
25.
Heinz, P.J. (2004). Towards enhanced second language reading comprehension assessment: Computerized versus manual scoring of written recall protocols . Reading in a Foreign Language, 16(2), 97-124.
26.
Hoey, M. (1991). Patterns of lexis in text. Oxford: Oxford University.
27.
Horiba, Y. (1990). Narrative comprehension processes: A study of native and non-native readers of Japanese. Modern Language Journal, 74(2), 188-202.
28.
Hyönä, J., Lorch, R.F., Jr., & Kaakinen, J.K. (2002). Individual differences in reading to summarize expository text: Evidence from eye fixation patterns . Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 44-55.
29.
Hyönä, J. & Nurminen, A. (2006). Do adult readers know how they read? Evidence from eye movement patterns and verbal reports. British Journal of Psychology, 97(1), 31-50.
30.
Jonz, J. (1994). The effects of textual cohesion and prior knowledge on native and nonnative cloze test scores. In J. W. Oller and J. Jonz (Eds.), Cloze and coherence. Cranbury, NJ: Bucknell University Press, 269-285.
31.
Just, M.A. & Carpenter, P.A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review , 99(1), 122-149.
32.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
33.
Kipfer, B.A. (1992). Roget's 21st century thesaurus in dictionary form . New York: Laurel.
34.
Kobayashi, M. (2002). Method effects on reading comprehension test performance: Text organization and response format. Language Testing, 19(2), 193-220.
35.
Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36.
Kostin, I., & Freedle, R. (1993). The prediction of TOEFL reading item difficulty: implications for construct validity. Language Testing, 10(2), 133-170.
37.
Kuo, L., & Anderson, R.C. (2006). Morphological awareness and learning to read. Educational Psychologist, 4, 161-180.
38.
Levy, B.A., Abello, B., & Lysynchuk, L. (1997). Transfer from word training to reading in context: Gains in reading fluency and comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 20(3), 173-188.
39.
Linderholm, T., Virtue, S., Tzeng, Y., & van den Broek, P. (2004). Fluctuations in the availability of information during reading: Capturing cognitive processes using the landscape model. Discourse Processes, 37(2),165-186.
40.
McKoon, G. & Ratcliff, R. (1980). The comprehension processes and memory structures involved in anaphoric reference. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(6), 668-682.
41.
McNamara, D.S., & Scott, J.L. (2001). Working memory capacity and strategy use. Memory & Cognition, 29(1), 10-17.
42.
Meyer, B.J.F. (1975). The organization of prose and its effects on memory . Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing .
43.
Nassaji, H. (2002). Schema theory and knowledge-based processes in second language reading comprehension: A need for alternative perspectives . Language Learning, 52(2), 439-481.
44.
Oller, J.W., Jr. (1972). Scoring methods and difficulty levels for cloze tests of proficiency in ESL. Modern Language Journal, 56(3), 151-158.
45.
Oller, J.W., Jr. (1994). Cloze, discourse, and approximation to English . In J. W. Oller, Jr.& J. Jonz (Eds.), Cloze and coherence (pp. 119-134). Cranbury, NJ: Bucknell University Press .
46.
Oller, J.W., Jr., Chen, L., Oller, S.D., & Pan, N. (2006). Empirical predictions from a general theory of signs. Discourse Processes, 40(2), 115-144.
47.
Oller, J. W., Jr., & Jonz, J. (Eds.). (1994). Cloze and coherence. Cranbury, NJ: Bucknell University Press .
48.
Oller, J.W., Jr., Oller, S.D., & Badon, L.C. (2006). Milestones: Normal speech and language development across the life span. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing.
49.
Perkins K., & Jones, B. (1985). Measuring passage contribution in ESL reading comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 19(1), 137-153.
50.
Pretorius, E.J. (2005). English as a second language learner differences in anaphoric resolution: Reading to learn in the academic context. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26(4), 521-539.
51.
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum .
52.
Pulido, D. (2004). The relationship between text comprehension and second language incidental vocabulary acquisition: A matter of topic familiarity ? Language Learning, 54(3), 469-523.
53.
Pylyshyn, Z.W. (2002). Mental imagery: In search of a theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(2), 157-238.
54.
Raney, G.E. (2003). A context-dependent representation model for explaining text repetition effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 10(1), 15-28.
55.
Raney, G.E., Therriault, D.J., & Minkoff, S.R.B. (2000). Repetition effects from paraphrased text: Evidence for an integrated representation model of text representation. Discourse Processes, 29(1), 61-81.
56.
Rayner, K., Raney, G.E., & Pollatsek, A. (1997). Eye movements and discourse processing. In R. F. Lorch, & E. J. O'Brien (Eds.), Sources of coherence in reading (pp. 9-35). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
57.
Reynolds, D.W. (1995). Repetition in nonnative speaker writing: More than quantity. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17(2), 185-209.
58.
Rupp, A.A., Ferne, T., & Choi, H. (2006). How assessing reading comprehension with multiple-choice questions shapes the construct: A cognitive processing perspective. Language Testing, 23(4), 441-474.
59.
Sadoski, M. (1998). Comprehending comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 34(4), 493-500.
60.
Schmitt, N. & Meara, P. (1997). Researching vocabulary through a word knowledge framework. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 17-36.
61.
Swaffar, J.K. (1988). Readers, texts, and second languages: The interactive process. Modern Language Journal, 72(2), 123-149.
62.
Tabachnick, B.G. & Fidell, L.S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
63.
Tyler, A. (1992). Discourse structure and the perception of incoherence in international teaching assistants' spoken discourse. TESOL Quarterly, 26(4), 713-729.
64.
Yamada, K. (2005). Lexical patterns in the eyes of intermediate EFL readers. RELC Journal, 36(2), 177-188.
65.
Yamashita, J. (2003). Process of taking a gap-filling test: Comparison of skilled and less skilled EFL readers. Language Testing , 20(3), 267-293.
66.
Walczyk, J.J. & Taylor R.W. (1996). How do the efficiencies of reading subcomponents relate to looking back in text?Journal of Educational Psychology , 88(3), 537-545.
67.
Zhang, L.J. (2001). Awareness in reading: EFL students' metacognitive knowledge of reading strategies in an acquisition-poor environment. Language Awareness, 10(4), 268-288.
68.
Zwaan, R.A. (2004). The immersed experiencer: Toward an embodied theory of language comprehension. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 35-62). New York: Academic Press.
