Visual Displays in Basal Readers and Social Studies Textbooks

  • Barbara Hunter
  • Avon Crismore
  • P. David Pearson


The primary and immediate purpose of the work reported in this chapter is to validate a system for analyzing the form, function, and utility of visual displays of information appearing in text. A secondary purpose is to compare the use of visual displays in basal reading texts with their use in social studies texts; presumably such a comparison would involve a contrast between texts providing instruction in decoding and sight word skills as students learn to read and texts providing instruction in comprehension as students read to learn. But the ultimate goal of the line of research of which this work is a small piece is to understand the cognitive and contextual conditions in which different presentational media (for instance, text, photographs, artwork, maps, diagrams, charts, or tables) help or hinder written communication; put differently, our long-rang’ goal is to understand when a “picture” (in our case, a visual display) is worth a thousand words and when it might not be worth even two or three.


Content Area Social Study Visual Display Basal Text Basal Reader 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Armbruster, B. (in press). Organizing social studies information into knowledge frames. (Reading Education Report). Champaign, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Center for the Study of Reading.Google Scholar
  2. Arnheim, R. A. (1956). Art and visual thinking. London: Faber & Faber.Google Scholar
  3. Cleveland, W. S. (1985). The elements of graphing data. Monterey, CA: Wadsworth Advanced Books and Software.Google Scholar
  4. Crismore, A. (1984). A message to authors about metadiscourse use in instructional text. In J. A. Niles & L. A. Harris (Eds.), Changing perspectives in reading/language processing (Thirty-third Yearbook of the National Reading Conference) (pp. 66–74). Rochester, NY: The National Reading Conference.Google Scholar
  5. Davison, A., & Kantor, R. N. (1982). On the failure of readability formulas to define readable texts: A case study from adaptations. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 187–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Doblin, J. (1980). A structure for nontextual communications. In P. A. Kolers, M. E. Wrolstad, & H. Bouma (Eds.), The Processing of Visible Language (Vol. 2, pp. 89–111). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  7. Frase, L. T., & Schwartz, F. J. (1975). Effect of question production and answering on prose recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 628–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fry, E. (1981). Graphical literacy. Journal of Reading, 24, 383–390.Google Scholar
  9. Gallagher, M. C. (1985). Knowledge acquisition in the content area classroom: Exploring the consequences of instruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
  10. Hartley, J. (1981). Eighty ways of improving instructional text.IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, PC-24, 17–27.Google Scholar
  11. Hunter, B., Pearson, P. D., & Crismore, A. (in press). Visual displays in basal readers. (Technical Report). Champaign, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Center for the Study of Reading.Google Scholar
  12. Langer, S. K. (1953). Feeling and form: A theory of art. New York: Charles Scribner.Google Scholar
  13. Langer, S. K. (1957). Problems of art. New York: Charles Scribner.Google Scholar
  14. Langer, S. K. (1962). Philosophy in a new key. New York: The New American Library.Google Scholar
  15. Meyer, B. J., & Rice, E. (1984). The structure of text. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 319–351). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  16. Moore, D. W., & Readance, J. E. (1979). A metanalysis of graphic organizers on learning from text. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Reading Conference. San Antonio, December.Google Scholar
  17. Pearson, P. D., & Camperell, K. (1981). Comprehension of text structures. In J. T. Guthrie (Ed.), Comprehension and teaching: Research reviews (pp. 27–55). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
  18. Rothkopf, E. Z. (1971). Incidental memory for location of information in text.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 10, 608–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rothkopf, E. Z., & Billington, M. J. (1979). Goal-guided learning from text: Inferring a descriptive processing model from inspection times and eye movements. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 310–327.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Santa, C., & Hayes, B. (Eds.). (1981). Children’s prose comprehension: Research and practice. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
  21. Tufte, W. (1986). The visual displays of quantitative information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.Google Scholar
  22. Wainer, H. E. (1984). How to display data badly. (Technical Report No. 82–83). Princeton, NJ: Program Statistics Research, Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
  23. Winn, W.’D., & Holliday, W. G. (1982). Design principles for diagrams and charts. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), The technology of text: Vol. 1 (pp. 277–299). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barbara Hunter
  • Avon Crismore
  • P. David Pearson

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations