Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Reading the graphics: what is the relationship between graphical reading processes and student comprehension?

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Research on comprehension of written text and reading processes suggests a greater use of reading processes is associated with higher scores on comprehension measures of those same texts. Although researchers have suggested that the graphics in text convey important meaning, little research exists on the relationship between children’s processes prompted by the graphics in informational text and their overall comprehension of the same texts. In this study, 30 second-graders read 2 informational texts, were prompted to share their thinking whenever they looked at a graphic, retold each text in their own words, and answered 8 comprehension questions about each text. Correlations between students’ scores on the post-reading comprehension measures and the reading processes prompted by the graphics suggested that: (1) the number of times any process was prompted by the graphics was significantly correlated with scores on the retelling measure for one book, but not for the retelling measure of the other book or for the comprehension question measure for either book; (2) there were no significant correlations between the number of different processes prompted by the graphics and students’ scores on any comprehension measure; (3) a number of individual processes were positively correlated with retelling and/or comprehension question scores.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Afflerbach, P. (2000). Verbal reports and protocol analysis. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. III, pp. 163–180). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Afflerbach, P., & Johnston, P. (1984). Research methodology: On the use of verbal reports in reading research. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16, 307–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvermann, D. E. (1984). Second graders’ strategic reading preferences while reading basal stories. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(3), 184–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumann, J. F., & Bergeron, B. S. (1993). Story map instruction using children’s literature: Effects on first graders’ comprehension of central narrative elements. Journal of Reading Behavior, 25, 407–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, R. S., & Hickman, J. (1992). Four to fourteen or forty: Picture books are for everyone. In S. Benedict & L. Carlisle (Eds.), Beyond words: Picture books for older readers and writers (pp. 1–10). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braten, I., & Stromso, H. I. (2003). A longitudinal think-aloud study of spontaneous strategic processing during the reading of multiple expository texts. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 16, 195–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brookshire, J., Scharff, L. F. V., & Moses, L. E. (2002). The influence of illustrations on children’s book preferences and comprehension. Reading Psychology, 23, 323–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R., Pressley, M., Van Meter, P., & Schuder, T. (1996). A quasi-experimental validation of transactional strategies instruction with low-achieving second-grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 18–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carney, R. N., & Levin, J. R. (2002). Pictorial illustrations still improve students’ learning from text. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chall, J. S. (1996). Qualitative assessment of text difficulty: Practical guide for teachers and writers. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. C., & Lyons, C. (2004). Graphics for learning: Proven guidelines for planning, designing, and evaluation visuals in training materials. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dermitzaki, I., Andreou, G., & Paraskeva, V. (2008). High and low reading comprehension achievers’ strategic behavior and their relation to performance in a reading comprehension situation. Reading Psychology, 29, 471–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N. K. (2005). Comprehension of what for what: Comprehension as a nonunitary construct. In S. G. Paris & S. A. Stahl (Eds.), Children’s reading comprehension and assessment (pp. 93–104). Mahwah, NJ: Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N. K., & Kays, J. (1998). “Can I say ‘Once upon a time’?”: Kindergarten children developing knowledge of informational book language. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 13, 295–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N. K., & Pearson, P. D. (2002). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (Vol. 3, pp. 205–242). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N. K., Norman, R. R., Roberts, K. L., Martin, N. M., Knight, J. A., Morsink, P. M., Calkins, S. (2009). Visual literacy development in young children: An investigation with informational texts. Paper presented at the National Reading Conference, Albuquerque, NM.

  • Entwisle, D. R., & Astone, N. M. (1994). Some practical guidelines for measuring youth’s race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Child Development, 65, 1521–1540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fingeret, L. (2010). Graphics in children’s informational texts: Establishing a representative typology of images in informational textbooks, little books, and trade books. Manuscript in preparation.

  • Gambrell, L., & Jawitz, P. B. (1993). Mental imagery, text illustrations, and children’s story comprehension and recall. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 265–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannus, M., & Hyona, J. (1999). Utilization of illustrations during learning of science textbook passages among low- and high-ability children. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 95–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harber, J. R. (1983). The effects of illustrations on the reading performance of learning disabled and normal children. Learning Disability Quarterly, 6(1), 55–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2007). Strategies that work: Teaching comprehension for understanding and engagement. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilden, K. (2006). Verbal protocols: A window into second graders’ reading comprehension of narrative texts. Paper presented at the National Reading Conference, Los Angeles, CA.

  • Hilden, K. (2008). Connections between SpongeBob SquarePants and zoolpnaton: The informational reading comprehension processes of second graders. Paper presented at the National Reading Conference.

  • IRA/NCTE. (1996). Standards for the English language arts. Newark, DE: International Reading Association and the National Council of Teachers of English.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jewitt, C., & Oyama, R. (2001). Visual meaning: A social semiotic approach. In T. van Leeuwen & C. Jewitt (Eds.), Handbook of visual analysis (pp. 134–156). London, England: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keene, E. O., & Zimmermann, S. (2007). Mosaic of thought: The power of comprehension strategy instruction (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, J. R. (1981). On the functions of pictures in prose. In M. C. Wittrock & F. J. Pirozzolo (Eds.), Neuropsychological and cognitive processes in reading (pp. 203–228). New York, NY: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, J. R., Anglin, G. J., & Carney, R. N. (1987). On empirically validating functions of pictures in prose. In D. M. Willows & H. A. Houghton (Eds.), The psychology of illustration (Vol. I, pp. 51–85). New York, NY: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • MacGinitie, W. H., MacGinitie, R. K., Maria, K., & Dreyer, L. G. (2000). Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests: Level 2 Form T (4th ed.). Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Learning from texts: Effects of prior knowledge and text coherence. Discourse Processes, 22, 247–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McTigue, E. M. (2009). Does multimedia learning theory extend to middle-school students? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 143–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, B. J. F., Brandt, D. H., & Bluth, G. J. (1978). Use of author’s textual schema: Key for ninth graders’ comprehension. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Toronto, Canada.

  • Miller, W. A. (1938). Reading with or without pictures. The Elementary School Journal, 38, 676–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrow, L. M. (1985). Retelling stories: A strategy for improving young children’s comprehension, concept of story structure, and oral language complexity. The Elementary School Journal, 85, 646–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss, B. (1997). A qualitative assessment of first graders’ retelling of expository text. Reading Research and Instruction, 37, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss, B. (2008). Getting the picture: Visual dimensions of informational texts. In J. Flood, S. B. Heath, & D. Lapp (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching literacy through the communicative and visual arts (Vol. II, pp. 393–398). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Assessment Governing Board. (2008). Reading framework for the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Retrieved from www.nagb.org/publications/frameworks/reading09.pdf .

  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00–4769). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman, R. R. (2010a). Picture this: Reading processes prompted by the graphics in informational text. Literacy Teaching and Learning, 14(1–2), 1–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman, R. R. (2010b). Reading the graphics: Reading processes prompted by the graphics as second graders read informational text. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.

  • Norman, R. R. (2010c). Graphical reading processes and reading achievement: Is there a connection? Manuscript in preparation.

  • Odgers, S. (2008). Dino dig. Sydney, Australia: Weldon Owen Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 45, 255–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1994). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paris, A. H., & Paris, S. G. (2003). Assessing narrative comprehension in young children. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 36–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, Y. (2008). Patterns in and predictors of elementary students’ reading performance: Evidence from the data of the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.

  • Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., & Hilden, K. (2004). Verbal protocols of reading. In N. K. Duke & M. H. Mallette (Eds.), Literacy research methodologies (pp. 308–321). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purcell-Gates, V., Duke, N. K., & Martineau, J. A. (2007). Learning to read and write genre-specific text: Roles of authentic experience and explicit teaching. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 8–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Towards and R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, K. L. (2010). Retelling as a measure of primary grade narrative listening comprehension. Manuscript under review.

  • Romero, F., Paris, S. G., & Brem, S. K. (2005). Children’s comprehension and local-to-global recall of narrative and expository text. Current Issues in Education, 8(25). Retrieved from http://cie.asu.edu/volume8/number25/.

  • Rose, T. L. (1986). Effects of illustrations on reading comprehension of learning disabled students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19, 542–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, T. L., & Robinson, H. H. (1984). Effects of illustrations on learning disabled students’ reading performance. Learning Disability Quarterly, 7, 165–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rusted, J., & Coltheart, V. (1979). The effect of pictures on the retention of novel words and prose passages. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 28, 516–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, D. (2008). Weather watching. Syndey, Australia: Weldon Owen Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelstuen, M. S., & Braten, I. (2005). Decoding, knowledge, and strategies in comprehension of expository text. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 46, 107–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnotz, W., Picard, E., & Hron, A. (1993). How do successful and unsuccessful learners use text and graphics. Learning and Instruction, 3, 181–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, M. Y., Lovett, S. B., & Scher, M. S. (1993). Pictures facilitate children’s recall of unillustrated expository prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 520–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, B. M. (1980). Children’s memory for expository text after reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 15, 399–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66, 60–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, J. K., Miller, E., & Brubaker, D. (2004). The role of visual image: What are students really learning from pictorial representations? Journal of Visual Literacy, 24(1), 23–40.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mount Saint Mary College, 109 Hudson Hall, 330 Powell Avenue, Newburgh, NY, 12550, USA

    Rebecca R. Norman

Authors
  1. Rebecca R. Norman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rebecca R. Norman.

Appendices

Appendix 1

See Table 7.

Table 7 Retelling checklist for Dino Dig
Full size table

Appendix 2: Researcher-designed comprehension questions for Weather Watching

  1. 1.

    What are some different types of climates? (locate/recall)

    • 2 points—hot, cold, and mild (warm) OR desert, tropical, polar, mountain, temperate

    • 1 point—for naming at least 1 of the above

    • 0 points—for not naming any of the above

  2. 2.

    Why do you think the author talks about clouds on so many pages? (integrate/interpret)

    • 2 points—Because most weather comes from clouds like snow and rain and hail and all the weather pretty much has to do with the clouds like you can tell if it’s going to rain or it’s going to snow or stuff like that from looking at the clouds

    • 1 point—they are part of the weather and the book is about weather

    • 0 points—I don’t know; he likes clouds

  3. 3.

    What causes wind? (locate/recall)

    • 2 points—the sun heats the earth unevenly

    • 1 point—moving air; the sun

    • 0 points—I don’t know; a village

  4. 4.

    Why did the author put rain and snow in one section? (integrate/interpret)

    • 2 points—they are the same thing it is just when rain freezes it turns to snow

    • 1 point—they are like the same thing; they are similar

    • 0 points—he had enough room

  5. 5.

    Do you think the author did a good job of explaining what frost is? Why (not)? (critique/evaluate)

    • 2 points—Well, the writing part didn’t explain much about frost but the pictures when you looked at it you could see like the little spikes and like to me it automatically popped into my head and said, “oh that’s how frost looked” and I didn’t know how frost looked and that explained its

    • 2 points—Yes, because he told you how water freezes and it forms at night.

    • 1 point—Yes, he used a lot of details

    • 0 points—Yes, I don’t know; Yes, because frost is cool.

  6. 6.

    Why does the author write about rainbows? (integrate/interpret)

    • 2 points—Because rainbows have to do with weather. They have to do with sun and rain like combining

    • 1 point—because sun makes rainbows OR because rain makes rainbows

    • 0 points—he thinks rainbows are pretty

  7. 7.

    How did people learn about whether a long time ago? How do they learn about it today? (locate/recall)

    • 2 points—A long time ago they flew kites and today they use satellites to send back pictures

    • 1 point—answers one part of the question

    • 0 points—has neither answer

  8. 8.

    Why did the author write this book? (integrate/interpret)

    • 2 points—to teach people about weather like rain, snow, rainbows and how it forms.

    • 1 points—because weather is important

    • 0 points—he wanted to, he likes weather, etc.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Norman, R.R. Reading the graphics: what is the relationship between graphical reading processes and student comprehension?. Read Writ 25, 739–774 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-011-9298-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-011-9298-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation