A Critical Overview of Models of Reading Comprehension with a Focus on Cognitive Aspects
محورهای موضوعی : Research in English Language PedagogyMohammad Taghi Shahnazari 1 , Azizollah Dabaghi 2
1 - University of Isfahan, Iran
2 - University of Isfahan, Iran
کلید واژه: Reading Models, EFL learners, Cognitive Process, Attentional Resources,
چکیده مقاله :
Abstract Reading is a cognitive activity involving skills, strategies, attentional resources, knowledge resources and their integration. The reader’s role is to decode the written symbols to allow for the recovery of information from long-term memory to construct a plausible interpretation of the writer’s message. Various number of reading models have been proposed by researchers among which some focus on motivational and emotional aspects of reading. Others highlight the cognitive aspects of reading. In this study, the models characterizing reading in terms of cognitive aspects are revieweded, and different viewpoints on the reading process are described. This may help EFL/ESL teachers to improve their understanding of the reading process, update their perspectives on teaching reading tasks which in turn might result in more efficient learning by not putting too much cognitively demanding reading tasks on EFL/ESL learners.
Abu Rabia, S. (2003). The influence of working memory on reading and creative writing processes in a second language. Educational Psychology, 23(2) 209-222.
Adams, M.J. (1994). Modelling the connections between word recognition and reading. In R.B. Ruddell, M.R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 830-863). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
lderson, J.C. (2000). Assessing reading.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Anderson, N.J. (1991). Individual differences in
strategy use in second language reading and testing. Modern Language Journal, 75, 460-472.
Baddeley, A.D., & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory revised. American Psychologist, 19, 851-864.
Balota, D., Pollasek, A., & Rayner, K. (1985). The interaction of contextual constraints and Parafoveal visual information in reading. Cognitive Psychology,17, 364-390.
Barry, S.,&Lazarte, A.A. (1998). Evidence for mental models: how do prior knowledge, syntactic complexity, and reading topic affect inference generation in a recall task for nonnative readers of Spanish? Modern Language Journal, 82(2), 176-193.
Becker, C.A. (1985). What do we really know about semantic context during reading? In
D. Besner, T. Walker & G. Mackinnon (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice, 5 (pp. 125-166). NewYork: Academic Press.
Beech, J.R. (1997). Assessment of memory and reading. In Beech, J.R. and Singleton, C. (Eds.), The psychological assessment of reading. London: Routledge.
Biemiller, A. (1979). Changes in the use of graphic and contextual information as functions of passage difficulty and reading achievement level. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11, 307-319.
Cain, K. & Oakhill, J. (2006). Assessment matters: Issues in the measurement of reading comprehension. British Journal of Educational Psychology,76, 697-708.
Carroll, D.W. (2008). Psychology of language.
Thomson Wadsworth: Canada.
Carroll J.B. (1964). Language and thought.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Prentice Hall. Chamot, A.U., & El-Dinary, P.B. (1999).
Children’s reading strategies in language immersion classrooms. Modern Language
Journal, 83, 319-338.
Clarke, M.A. (1980). The short circuit hypothesis of ESL reading: Or when language competence interferes with reading performance. Modern Language Journal, 64, 203-209.
Cziko, G. (1980). Language competence and reading strategies: A comparison of first and second language oral reading errors.
Language Learning,30, 101-116.
Daneman, M. & Carpenter, P.A. (1980). Individual Differences in Working Memory and Reading.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour,19, 450-466.
Dechant, E. (1991). Understanding and teaching reading: An interactive model.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Divesta, F. J. & Dicintio, M. J. (1997). Interactive effects of working memory span and text context on reading comprehension and retrieval. Learning and Individual Differences,9(3), 215-231.
Ehri, L.C. (1998). Grapheme-phoneme knowledge is essential for learning to read words in English. In J.L. Metsala& L.C.
Ehri (Eds.), Word recognition in beginning literacy (pp. 3-40). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Favreau, M., &Segalowitz, N. (1982). Second language reading in fluent bilinguals.
Applied Psycholinguistics, 3, 329-341.
Field, J. (2003). Psycholinguistics: A resource book for students.Routledge: London.
Flesch, R. (1955). Why Johnny can’t read?
New York: Harper and Row.
Goodman, K.S. (1965). A linguistic study of cues and miscues in reading. Elementary English 42, 639-643.
Goodman, K.S. (1976), Reading: A Psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist,6, 126-135.
Goodman, K. (1996). On reading. Portsmouth,
NH: Heinemnn.
Gough, P.B. (1972). One second of reading. In J.F. Kavanagh & I.G. Mattingly (Eds.), In Language by ear and by eye (pp. 331-358). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Grabe, W. (2000). Reading research and its implications for reading assessment. In A.
Kunnan (Ed.), Fairness and validation in language assessment (Studies in Language Testing 9, pp. 226-62). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Grabe, W. & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. London: Longman.
Grabe, W. & Stoller, F.L. (2011). Teaching and researching reading (2nd Ed.). London: Longman.
Graesser, A., Millis, K., &Zwaan, R. (1997). Discourse comprehension. Annual Review of Psychology,48, 163-189.
Harrington, M., & Sawyer, M. (1992). L2 working memory capacity and L2 reading skill. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 25-38.
Haynes, M., & Carr, T.H. (1990). Writing system background and second language reading: A component skills analysis of English reading by native speaking-readers of Chinese. In T.H. Carr & B.A. Levy (Eds.), Reading and its development: Component skills approaches (pp. 375-421), San Diego: Academic Press.
Horiba, Y. (1990). Narrative comprehension processes: A study of native and non-native readers of Japanese. Modern Language Journal,74, 188-202.
Hockberg, J. (1970). Components of literacy speculations and exploratory research. In H. Levin & J.P. Williams (Eds.), Basic studies on reading. New York: Basic Books.
Hudson, T. (2007). Teaching second language reading. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of fifty-four children from first through fourth grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437-447.
Juel, C., Griffith, P.L., & Gough, P.B. (1986). Acquisition of literacy: A longitudinal study of children in first and second grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 243-255.
Just, M.A., & Carpenter, P.A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixation to comprehension, Psychological Review,87, 329-354.
Just, M.A., & Carpenter, P.A. (1987). The psychology of reading and language comprehension. Boston: Allyn& Bacon.
Kintsch, W. (1988a). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review,95, 163-182.
Kintsch, W. (1998b). Comprehension: A frame work for cognition. NewYork: Cambridge University Press.
Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review,85, 363-394.
Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading: A cross-linguistic approach. Cambridge University Press.
Koda, K. (2007). Reading and language learning. Blackwell Publishing: U.S.A.
Kuhara-Kojima, K., Hatano, G., Saito, H., &Haebara, T. (1996). Vocalization latencies of skilled and less skilled comprehenders for words written in Hiragana and Kanji. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 158- 171.
LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S.J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology,6, 293-323.
Levin, H. & Kaplan, E.L. (1970). Grammatical structure and reading. In H. Levin & J.P. Williams (Eds.), Basic studies on reading (pp. 62-75). New York: Basic Books.
Lesser, J.M. (2007). Learner-based factors in L2 reading comprehension and processing grammatical form: Topic familiarity and working memory, Language Learning, 57, 2, 229-270.
Macaro, E. (2003). Teaching and learning a second language: A guide to recent research and its applications. Continuum: London.
Mackworth, J.F. (1972). Some models of the reading process: Learners and skill readers. Reading research Quarterly, 7, 701-733.
Macnamara, J. (1970). Comparative studies of reading and problem solving in two languages. TESOL Quarterly 4, 107-116.
McConkie, G.W., & Zola, D. (1981). Language constraints and the functional stimulus in reading. In A.M. Lesgold& C.A. Perfetti (Eds.), Interactive process in reading (pp. 155-175). Hillsdale, NJ: Elrbaum.
Mitchell, D.C., (1982). The process of reading: A cognitive analysis of fluent reading andlearning to read. John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Perfetti, C.A. (1985). Reading ability. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Perfetti, C. (1999). Comprehending written language: A blueprint for the reader. In C. Brown & P. Hagoort (Eds.), Neurocognition of language (pp. 167-208). Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.
Perfetti, C. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 8, 293-304.
Perfetti, C., & Hart, L. (2001). The lexical basis of comprehension skill. In D. Gorfien (Ed.), On the consequences of meaning selection (pp. 67-86). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Perfetti, C., & Hart, L. (2002). The lexical quality hypothesis. In L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro, & P. Reitsma (Eds.). Precursors of functional literacy(pp189-213).Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
erfetti, C.A., &Lesgold, A.M. (1979). Coding and comprehension in skilled reading and implications for reading instruction. In L.B. Resnick& P. Weaver (Eds.), Theory andpractice of early reading (pp. 57-84). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works (3rded.). New York: Guilford Press.
Pring, L. &Snowling, M. (1986). Developmental changes in word recognition: An information-processing account. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 395-418.
Rayner, K., Bertera, J.H. (1979). Reading without a fovea.Science, 206, 468-469.
Rumelhart, D.E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In S. Dornic (Eds.), Attention and performance (pp. 573-603). New York: Academic Press.
Samuels, S.J. & Kamil, M.L. (1988). Models of the reading process. In Carrell, P., Devine, J. &Eskey, D. (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp. 22-36). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schank, R.C. (1978). Predictive understanding.In R.N. Campbell & P.T. Smith (Eds.),
Recent advances in the psychology of language–formal experimental Approaches (pp. 91-101).New York, NJ: Plenum Press.
Schankweiler, D., & Liberman, I. Y. (1972). Misreading. A research for causes. In J.F. Kavanaugh & I. G. Mattingly (Eds.), Language by eye and by ear (pp. 293-317). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Segalowitz, N., Poulson, C. and Komoda, M. (1991). Lower level of components reading skill in higher level bilinguals: Implications for reading instruction. Reading in Two Languages, ALLA Review, 8, 15-30.
Seidenberg, M.S., Tanehaus, M. K., Leiman, J.M., &Bienkowski, M. (1982). Automatic access of the meanings of ambiguous words in context: Some limitations of knowledge-based processing. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 489-537.
Stanovich, K.E. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly,
Stanovich, K.E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360-406.
Stanovich, K.E. (1988). The language code: Issues in word recognition. In S.R. Yussen & M.C. Smith (Eds.), Reading across the life span, New York: Springer-Verlag.
Smith, F. (1971). Understanding reading.
NewYork, MY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Stahl, S.A. (2003). Vocabulary and readability:
How knowing word meanings affects comprehension. Topics in Language Disorders, 23, 241-274.
Torgesen, J.K., & Burgess, S.R. (1998).
Consistency of reading related phonological processes throughout early childhood: Evidence from longitudinal, correlational and instructional studies. In J.L, Metsala&
L.C. Ehri (Eds.), Word recognition in beginning reading(p. 161-188). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Van Dijk, T., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academia Press.
Walczyk, J. (1995). Testing a compensatory-encoding model. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 396-408.
Walczyk, J. (2000). The interplay between automatic and control processes in reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 554-566.
Walczyk, J., Marsiglia, C., Bryan, K., &
Naquin, P. (2001). Overcoming inefficient reading skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 750-757.
Wagner, R.K., Torgesen, J.K. and Rashott, C.
(1994). Development on reading related phonological processing abilities: New evidence of bidirectional causality from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 30, 73-87
Waters, G.S., &Caplan, D. (1996). The measurement of verbal working memory capacity and its relation to reading comprehension. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,49A, 51-79.
Zhang, S., &Perfetti, C.A. (1993). The tongue-twister effect in reading Chinese. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 19, 1-12.
