Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Effect of delay on search decisions in a task-oriented reading environment

  • Published:
Metacognition and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The goal of this study was to determine the effect of setting a delay between reading a text and answering comprehension questions on when-to-search and what-to-search decisions in a task-oriented reading environment. Fifty-five eighth-grade students were randomly divided into two groups. One group read one text, answered comprehension questions regarding the text with the text available, and subsequently repeated the procedure with a second text (immediate condition). The other group read both texts first and then answered, with the texts available, the questions for the first text and then for the second text (delayed condition). In both conditions, the readers’ actions during the task were recorded. The results demonstrated that the students in the delayed condition made more search decisions. In addition, moderated mediation analyses indicated that setting a delay had a positive indirect effect on performance via increased searching only for the students with average and high comprehension skills. Moreover, decisions regarding what information to search for depended exclusively on comprehension skill. Instructional implications are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The following analyses were based on a hypothesis for which a clear direction of the results was expected. Thus, in all significance contrasts, we used one-tailed tests.

References

  • Aiken, S., & West, G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, M. C. M., & Thiede, K. W. (2008). Why do delayed summaries improve metacomprehension accuracy? Acta Psychologica, 128, 110–118. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2007.10.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cataldo, M. G., & Oakhill, J. (2000). Why are poor comprehenders inefficient searchers? An investigation into the effects of text representation and spatial memory on the ability to locate information in text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 791–799. doi:10.1037/0022–0663.92.4.791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cerdán, R., Gilabert, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2011). Selecting information to answer questions: Strategic individual differences when searching texts. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(2), 201–205. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2010.11.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coté, N., Goldman, S. R., & Saul, E. U. (1998). Students making sense of informational text: Relations between processing and representation. Discourse Processes, 25, 1–53. doi:10.1080/01638539809545019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognition. London: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K., & Middleton, E. (2005). What constrains the accuracy of metacomprehension judgments? Testing the transfer appropriate- monitoring and accessibility hypotheses. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 551–565. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2005.01.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernández, J. (1959). Medidas sencillas de lecturabilidad. Consigna, 214, 29–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrer, A., Vidal-Abarca, E., Avila, V., Mañá, A., & Llorens, A. C. (2010). Do text availability and question format have an impact on on-line reading behavior and comprehension processes? Paper presented at the 20th Annual Meeting of the Society for Text & Discourse. Chicago: August.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil, L., Martínez, T., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2015). On-line assessment of strategic reading literacy skills. Computers & Education, 82, 50–59. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannon, B., & Daneman, M. (2004). Shallow semantic processing of text: An individual-differences account. Discourse Processes, 37(3), 187–204. doi:10.1207/s15326950dp3703_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, Andrew F. (2012), “PROCESS: A Versatile Computational Tool for Observed Variable Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Modeling,” white paper, The Ohio State University.

  • Hayes, A. F., & Matthes, J. (2009). Computational procedures for probing interactions in OLS and logistic regression: SPSS and SAS implementations. Behavior Research Methods, 41(3), 924–936. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.3.924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgs, K., Magliano, J. P., Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, T., & McNamara, D. S. (2015). Bridging Skill and Task Oriented Reading. Manuscript submitted for publication

  • Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one's own knowledge during study: a cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126(4), 349–370. doi:10.1037/0096–3445.126.4.349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linn, L. M., Moore, D., & Zabrucky, K. M. (2001). An assessment of students’ calibration of comprehension and calibration of performance using multiple measures. Reading Psychology, 22, 111–128. doi:10.1080/02702710119125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magliano, J. P., Trabasso, T., & Graesser, A. C. (1999). Strategic processing during comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 615. doi:10.1037/0022–0663.91.4.615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maki, R. H. (1998). Test predictions over text material. In D. J. Hacker, A. C. Graesser, & J. Dunlosky (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 117–144). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maki, R. H., Jonas, D., & Kallod, M. (1994). The relationship between comprehension and metacomprehension ability. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1, 126–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maki, R. H., Shields, M., Wheeler, A. E., & Zachilli, T. L. (2005). Individual differences in absolute and relative metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(4), 723–731. doi:10.1037/0022–0663.97.4.723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez, T., Vidal-Abarca, E., Sellés, P., & Gilabert, R. (2008). Evaluación de las estrategias y procesos de comprensión: el Test de Procesos de Comprensión. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 31(3), 319–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. (2009). Toward a comprehensive model of comprehension. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 51, 297–384. doi:10.1016/S0079–7421(09)51009–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ness, M. (2011). Explicit reading comprehension instruction in elementary classrooms: teacher use of reading comprehension strategies. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 25(1), 98–117. doi:10.1080/02568543.2010.531076.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2002). Programme for International Student Assessment: Sample tasks from the PISA 2000 assessment of reading, mathematical and scientific literacy. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2010). PISA 2009 Results: What students know and can do. Student performance in reading, mathematics and science. (Volume I). Paris: OECD.

  • Ozuru, Y., Best, R., Bell, C., Witherspoon, A., & McNamara, D. S. (2007). Influence of question format and text availability on the assessment of expository text comprehension. Cognition and Instruction, 25, 399–438. doi:10.1080/07370000701632371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, method, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 185–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramos, J. L. y Cuetos, F. (1999): Evaluación de los procesos lectores en alumnus del tercer ciclo de Educación Primaria y ESO (PROLEC-SE), MADRID, TEA Ediciones.

  • Ramos, L., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2013). Diferencias entre estudiantes con alta y baja competencia lectora: un estudio con metodología de pensar en voz alta (Differences between students with high and low reading literacy skills: A study with think aloud methodology). Cultura y Educación, 25(3), 295–308. doi:10.1174/113564013807749722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, M. G., & Tauber, S. K. (2011). The influence of delaying judgments of learning on metacognitive accuracy: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 131–148. doi:10.1037/a0021705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouet, J. F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to Web-based learning. Psychology Press.

  • Salmerón, L., Vidal-Abarca, E., Mañá, A., Martínez, T., Gil, L., & Naumann, J. (2015). Strategic decisions in task-oriented reading. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 18, 1–10. doi:10.1017/sjp.2015.101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaffner, E., & Schiefele, U. (2013). The prediction of reading comprehension by cognitive and motivational factors: Does text accessibility during comprehension testing make a difference? Learning and Individual Differences, 26, 42–54. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2013.04.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C. & RAND Reading Study Group (2002). Reading for understanding. RAND URL: http://www.rand.org/

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognition monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 66–73. doi:10.1037/0022–0663.95.1.66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thiede, K. W., Dunlosky, J., Griffin, T. D., & Wiley, J. (2005). Understanding the delayed keyword effect on metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1267–1280. doi:10.1037/0278–7393.31.6.1267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidal-Abarca, E., Gilabert, R., Martínez, T., Sellés, P., Abad, N., & Ferrer, C. (2007). TEC, Test de Estrategias de Comprensión (Test of Comprehension Strategies). Madrid: ICCE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidal-Abarca, E., Mañá, A., & Gil, L. (2010). Individual differences for self-regulating task-oriented reading activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 817–826. doi:10.1037/a0020062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidal-Abarca, E., Martinez, T., Salmerón, L., Cerdán, R., Gilabert, R., Gil, L., Mañá, A., Llorens, A. C., & Ferris, R. (2011). Recording online processes in task-oriented reading with Read&Answer. Behavior Research Methods, 43(1), 179–192. doi:10.3758/s13428–010–0032-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidal-Abarca, E., Britt, M. A., & Rouet, J-F. (2015). Reading as decision making. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by Conselleria de Educacion, Cultura y Deportes de la Generalitat Valenciana (Grant PROMETEO/2013/011).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Facultad de Psicología, ERI Lectura, Universidad de Valencia, Av. Blasco Ibáñez, 21, 46010, Valencia, Spain

    Amelia Mañá, Eduardo Vidal-Abarca & Ladislao Salmerón

Authors
  1. Amelia Mañá
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eduardo Vidal-Abarca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ladislao Salmerón
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amelia Mañá.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mañá, A., Vidal-Abarca, E. & Salmerón, L. Effect of delay on search decisions in a task-oriented reading environment. Metacognition Learning 12, 113–130 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016-9162-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016-9162-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation