Abstract
This study employed eyetracking technology to investigate adolescent students’ reading processes as they composed and to explore relationships between these reading processes and text quality. A sample of 32 adolescent students composed narrative and expository texts while eyetracking equipment recorded their eye movements. Eye movements upon a computer monitor indicating reading processes during composing were coded according to their position in the emerging text, and were coded as: reading at the point of inscription (monitoring recently composed words); local reading (reading recently composed sentences); global reading (reading paragraphs); or prompt reading. It was hypothesized that two reading during writing behaviors, global reading and local reading, would be related to text quality. Results of the multinomial multilevel logistic regression analysis indicated significant relationships between two reading processes (local reading and reading at the point of inscription, but not global reading), composing rate, and text quality.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
For example, changing the step size or initial window.
Recall, the transformation of the data was such that correlations among the residuals were expected.
Additional tables can be provided upon request.
References
Alamargot, D., Chesnet, D., Dansac, C., & Ros, C. (2006). Eye and Pen: A new device for studying reading during writing. Behavior Research Methods, 38, 287–299.
Bangert Drowns, R. L. (1993). The word processor as an instructional tool: A meta-analysis of word processing in writing instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63, 69–93.
Beers, S. F., & Nagy, W. E. (2009). Syntactic complexity as a predictor of adolescent writing quality: Which measures? Which genre? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22, 185–200.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Berman, R. A., & Katzenberger, I. (2004). Form and function in introducing narrative and expository texts: A developmental perspective. Discourse Processes, 38, 57–94.
Botvin, G. J., & Sutton-Smith, B. (1977). The development of structural complexity in children’s fantasy narratives. Developmental Psychology, 13, 377–388.
Bourdin, B., & Fayol, M. (1994). Is written language production more difficult than oral language production? A working memory approach. International Journal of Psychology, 29, 591–620.
Bourdin, B., & Fayol, M. (2000). Is graphic activity cognitively costly? A developmental approach. Reading and Writing, 13, 183–196.
Breetvelt, I., Van den Bergh, H., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1996). Rereading and generating and their relation to text quality: An application of multilevel analysis on writing process data. In G. Rijlaarsdam, H. van den Bergh, & M. Couzijn (Eds.), Theories, models, and methodology in writing research (pp. 10–20). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Britton, J. (1982). Shaping at the point of utterance. In G. M. Pradl (Ed.), Prospect and retrospect: Selected essays of James Britton. London: BoyntonCook.
Cameron, C. A., Lee, K., Webster, S., & Munro, K. (1995). Text cohesion in children’s narrative writing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 16, 257–269.
Carver, R. (1992). Rauding theory. Journal of Reading, 36, 84–95.
Coirier, P. (1996). Composing argumentative texts: Cognitive and/or textual complexity. In G. Rijlaarsdam, H. van den Bergh, & M. Couzijn (Eds.), Current trends in writing research: What is writing? Theories, models, and methodology (pp. 317–337). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–466.
Drieghe, D., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2005). Eye movement and word skipping during reading revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 954–959.
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1980). The dynamics of composing: Making plans and juggling constraints. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Graham, S. (1990). The role of production factors in learning disabled students’ compositions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 781–791.
Graham, S., & Weintraub, N. (1996). A review of handwriting research: Progress and prospects from 1980 to 1994. Educational Psychology Review, 8, 7–87.
Hayes, J. R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (pp. 1–27). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3–30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hidi, S., & Hildyard, P. (1983). The comparison of oral and written productions of two discourse types. Discourse Processes, 6, 91–105.
Hyona, 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, 44–55.
Janssen, D., Van Waes, L., & Van den Bergh, H. (1996). Effects of thinking aloud on writing processes. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (pp. 233–250). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kaufer, D. S., Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1986). Composing written sentences. Research in the Teaching of English, 20, 121–140.
Kellogg, R. T. (1996). A model of working memory in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (pp. 57–71). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kellogg, R. T. (2008). Training writing skills: A cognitive developmental perspective. Journal of writing research, 1, 1–26.
Matsuhashi, A. (1987). Revising the plan and altering the text. In A. Matsuhashi (Ed.), Writing in real time: Modelling production processes (pp. 197–223). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
McCutchen, D. (1987). Children’s discourse skill: Form and modality requirements of schooled writing. Discourse Processes, 10, 267–286.
McCutchen, D. (1996). A capacity theory of writing: Working memory in composition. Educational Psychology Review, 8, 299–325.
McCutchen, D., Francis, M., & Kerr, S. (1997). Revising for meaning: Effects of knowledge and strategy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 667–676.
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (2004). 6+1 Trait writing—about. Retrieved August 2, 2007, from http://www.nwet.org/assessment/about.php?odelay=1&d=1.
Perl, S. (1979). The composing processes of unskilled college writers. Research in the Teaching of English, 13, 317–336.
Pianko, S. (1979). The description of the composing processes of college freshmen writers. Research in the Teaching of English, 13, 5–22.
Rayner, K. (1984). Visual selection in reading, visual perception, and visual search: A tutorial review. In H. Bouma & D. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance (Vol. 10). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 Years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372–422.
Reece, J. E., & Cumming, G. (1996). Evaluating speech-based composition methods: Planning, dictation, and the listening word processor. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (pp. 361–380). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Goleman, H. (1982). The role of production factors in writing ability. In M. Nystrand (Ed.), What writers know: The language, process, and structure of written discourse (pp. 175–210). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2001). Linguistic features of the language of schooling. Linguistics and Education, 12, 431–459.
Snijders, T., & Bosker, R. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London: Sage Publications.
Stallard, C. K. (1974). An analysis of the writing behavior of good student writers. Research in the Teaching of English, 8, 206–218.
Strömqvist, S., & Homqvist, K. (2001). The dynamics of production and perception during text writing. Paper presented at the Production of text and processes of revision: Methods in real time conference. Poitiers, France.
Torrance, M., & Galbraith, D. (2006). The processing demands of writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 67–80). New York: Guilford Press.
Woodcock, R., & Johnson, B. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson psychoeducational battery–III tests of achievement. Chicago, IL: Riverside Publishing.
Acknowledgments
We thank Judy Ramey and Rich DeSantos for their assistance with the eyetracking equipment in the LUTE Lab at the College of Technical Communication (University of Washington). We also thank John Gottman of the Relationship Research Institute for the use of coding equipment used in this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Beers, S.F., Quinlan, T. & Harbaugh, A.G. Adolescent students’ reading during writing behaviors and relationships with text quality: an eyetracking study. Read Writ 23, 743–775 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9193-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9193-7