Extending the Sentence Verification Technique to Tables and Node-Link Diagrams

  • Mark A. Livingston
  • Derek Brock
  • Tucker Maney
  • Dennis Perzanowski
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 785)


In addition to prose, situation reports used by various organizations often present supporting information in “visual” formats that pose unique challenges for assessing readers’ comprehension. Two of the more common information categories seen in these reports are text-based tables and node-link diagrams. To better understand what readers attend to in these formats, we adapted a proven method for assessing prose comprehension, known as the Sentence Verification Technique (SVT), to these ancillary materials and conducted an exploratory reading study with format, aspects of the SVT, and contextual information as independent variables. Except for tables, error rates were comparatively uniform. Assessments of prose were significantly faster than assessments of diagrammatic information, which in turn were significantly faster than table assessments. The latter also took longer when posed without contextual details. We conclude that the SVT can be successfully adapted for information in ancillary formats and discuss further research issues for this endeavor.


Reading comprehension Sentence Verification Technique (SVT) Text tables Node-link diagrams Quantitative evaluation 



Wende Frost contributed to early portions of this work. This research was supported by the Naval Research Laboratory Base Program.


  1. 1.
    United States Marine Corps: Submission Requirements for the Commanders’ Operational Situation Report (SITREP) (Marine Corps Order 3000.2J). Washington, DC (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF): The Situation Analysis of Children and Women in Belize 2011: An Ecological Review, Belize City (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    World Health Organization (WHO): Ebola Situation Reports: Archive (2016).
  4. 4.
    Rayner, K.: Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychol. Bull. 124(3), 372–422 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Royer, J.M., Hastings, C.N., Hook, C.: A sentence verification technique for measuring reading comprehension. J. Read. Behav. 11(4), 355–363 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Royer, J.M.: Developing reading and listening comprehension tests based on the sentence verification technique (SVT). J. Adolesc. Adult Lit. 45(1), 30–41 (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brock, D., McClimens, B., Trafton, J.G., McCurry, M., Perzanowski, D.: Evaluating listeners’ attention to and comprehension of spatialized concurrent and serial talkers at normal and a synthetically faster rate of speech. In: 14th International Conference on Auditory Display. IRCAM, Paris (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brock, D., Wasylyshyn, C., McClimens, B., Perzanowski, D.: Facilitating the watchstander’s voice communications task in future navy operations. In: Wilson, D. (ed.) IEEE Military Communications Conference, pp. 2222–2226. IEEE, New York (2011).
  9. 9.
    Royer, J.M., Cunningham, D.J.: On the theory and measurement of reading comprehension. Technical report No. 91, Center for the Study of Reading, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (1978)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mosenthal, P.B., Kirsch, I.S.: A new measure for assessing document complexity: the PMOSE/IKIRSCH document readability formula. J. Adolesc. Adult Lit. 41(8), 638–657 (1998)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kosslyn, S.M.: Graph Design for the Eye and Mind. Oxford University Press, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tulving, E., Thomson, D.M.: Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychol. Rev. 80(5), 352–373 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Livingston, M.A., Brock, D., Maney, T., Perzanowski, D.: Report on an Extension of the Sentence Verification Technique to Multimedia Documents with Tables and Node-link Diagrams. NRL Information Management and Decision Architectures Report IMDA-11 (2018)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kincaid, J.P., Fishburne Jr., R.P., Rogers, R.L., Chissom, B.S.: Derivation of New Readability Formulas (Automated Readability Index, Fog Count, and Flesch Reading Ease Formula) for Navy Enlisted Personnel. Research Branch Report 8–75. Chief of Naval Technical Training: Naval Air Station Memphis (1975)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pinker, S.: A theory of graph comprehension. In: Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Testing, pp. 73–126. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (1990)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cromley, J.G., Snyder-Hogan, L.E., Luciw-Dubas, U.A.: Cognitive activities in complex science text and diagrams. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 35(1), 59–74 (2010). Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature (outside the USA) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark A. Livingston
    • 1
  • Derek Brock
    • 1
  • Tucker Maney
    • 1
  • Dennis Perzanowski
    • 1
  1. 1.Naval Research LaboratoryWashington, DCUSA

Personalised recommendations