Abstract
Subjects’ Comprehension and Memory of Conventional Presentations (Pages) And Rapid, Serial Visual Presentations (Rsvps) Of Text Were Investigated With A Statement-Recognition Test. Texts Were Presented With Sentences in An Intact Or A Scrambled Order At Rates Of 300 And 600 Words Per Minute (Wpm). Subjects’ Memory for Text Meaning And Surface Structure Was Better In 300-Than In 600-Wpm Conditions, And Subjects Retained More Textual Meaning From Coherent than Incoherent Texts Regardless of Display Rates. These Findings Are Inconsistent With the Idea That Rapid Reading Disrupts the Intersentence Integration Processes of Comprehension, but are Consistent With The Hypothesis of Consolidation Limitation: Furthermore, Subjects Were Separated Into Two Groups Based on Their Performance on the Reading Span Test of Daneman And Carpenter (1980). Low-Span Subjects Retained Significantly Less Text Meaning than High-Span Subjects with Pages, But They Did Almost As Well With RSVPs. This Interaction Suggests that the RSVP Technique Could Be Useful For Improving the Reading Abilities of Less Efficient Readers.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Breitmeyer, B. G. (1983). Sensory Masking, Persistence, and Enhancement In Visual Exploration and Reading. In K. Rayner (Ed.),Eye Movements in Reading (Pp. 3–30). New York: Academic Press.
Chen, H.-C., Healy, A. F, &Bourne, L. E., Jr. (1985). Effects of Presentation Complexity on Rapid-Sequential Reading.Perception & Psychophysics,38, 461–470.
Cocklin, T. G., Ward, N. J., Chen, H.-C., &,Juola, J. F. (1984). Factors Influencing Readability of Rapidly-Presented Text Segments.Memory & Cognition,12, 431–442.
Daneuan, M., &Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual Differences In Working Memory and ReadingJournal Of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavtor,19, 450–466.
Daneuan, M, &,Carpenter, P. A. (1983). Individual Differences Integrating Information Between And Within Sentences.Journal Of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,9, 561–584.
Gilbert, L. C. (1959). Saccadic Movements as a Factor in Visual Perception in reading.Journal of Educational Psychology,50, 15–19.
Huey, E. B. (1968).The Psychology and Pedagogy Of Reading. Cambridge, Ma: Mit Press. (Originally published, 1908.)
Juola, J. F., Ward, N., &Mcnamara, T. (1982). Visual Search And Reading of Rapid, Serial Presentations of Letter Strings, words, and text.Journal Of Experimental Psychology: General,111, 208–227.
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A., &Woollev, J. D. (1982). Paradigms and Processes in Reading Comprehension.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Genera,111, 228–238.
Kintsch, W., Mandel, T., &Kozminsky, E. (1977). Summarizing Stories.Memory & Cognition,5, 547–552.
Lawrence, D. (1971). Two Studies of Visual Search for Word Targets With Controlled Rates of Presentation.perception & Psychophysics,10, 85–89.
Lesgold, A. M., &Perfetti, C. A. (1978). Interactive Processes In Reading Comprehension.discourse Processes,1, 323–336.
Masson, M. E. J. (1983). Conceptual Processing of text during Skimming and Rapid Sequential Reading.Memory & Cognition,11, 262–274.
Masson, M. E. J., &Miller, J. A. (1983). Working Memory and Individual Differences in Comprehension and Memory of Text.Journal of Educational Psychology,75, 314–318.
Mccall, W. A., &Schroeder, L. C. (1979).Mccall-Crabbs Standard Test Lessons in Reading. New York: Teachers’ College Press.
Patberg, J. P., &Yonas, A. (1978). The Effects of the Reader’S Skill and The Difficulty of the text on the Perceptual Span in Reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,4, 545–552.
Pezdek, K., &,Cain, H.-C. (1982). Developmental Differences In The Role of Detail in Picture Recogintion Memory.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,33, 207–215.
Potter, M. C. (1984). Rapid Serial Visual Presentation (RSPV): A Method For Studying Language Processing. In D. E. Kieras & M. A. Just (Eds.),New Methods in Reading Comprehension Research (Pp. 91- 118). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Potter, M. C., Kroll, J. F., &Haarris, C. (1980). Comprehension and Memory in Rapid-Sequential Reading. in R. Nickerson (Ed.),Attention And Performance VIII (pp. 395–418). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rafnel, K. J., &Klatzkv, R. L. (1978). Meaningful-Interpretation Effects on Codes of Nonsense Pictures.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,4, 631–646.
Raygor, R. (1974).An Investigation of The Relationship Between Eye Movements And Comprehension In Fluent readers. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Minnesota.
Sachs, J. D. S. (1967). Recognition Memory for Syntactic And Semantic Aspects of Connected Discourse.Perception & Psychophysics,2, 437–442.
Thorndyke, P. W. (1977). Cognitive Structures in Comprehension And Memory of Narrative Discourse.Cognitive Psychology,9, 77–110.
Ward, N. J., &Juola, J. F. (1982). Reading With and Without Eye Movements: Reply to Just, Carpenter, and Woolley.journal of Experimental Psychology: General,111, 239–241.
Willows, D. M. (1974). Reading between the Lines: Selective Attention in Good and Poor Readers.Child Development,45, 408–415.
Willows, D. M. (1978), Individual Differences in Distraction by Pictures in a Reading Situation.Journal of Educational Psychology,70, 837–847.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chen, HC. Effects of reading span and textual coherence on rapid-sequential reading. Memory & Cognition 14, 202–208 (1986). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197693
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197693