Biomedical subjects

Katherine A Rawson

Publications and source records attributed to Katherine A Rawson.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2002

Are performance predictions for text based on ease of processing?

In 4 experiments, the authors evaluated the hypothesis that performance predictions for text are based on ease of processing. In each experiment, participants read texts, predicted their performance for each one, and then were tested. Ease of processing was manipulated by having participants read texts that varied in coherence. Coherence was varied by manipulating causal relatedness across sentence pairs (Experiments 1 and 2) and by altering the structure of sentences within paragraphs (Experiment 3). In these experiments, prediction magnitudes increased as coherence increased, suggesting that predictions were based on processing ease. In Experiment 4, prediction magnitudes were greater for intact paragraphs than for paragraphs with letters deleted from some of the words. Discussion focuses on resolving apparent inconsistencies in the literature concerning whether processing ease influences performance predictions.

Attention↗

PubMed2002

Influences of metamemory on performance predictions for text.

When predicting future performance on tests over text material, do individuals estimate retention in addition to assessing comprehension? In Experiment 1, participants either rated their comprehension or predicted performance for each text, with lower ratings indicating lower confidence either in comprehension or in eventual performance. Judgement magnitude was significantly lower for performance predictions than for comprehension ratings, suggesting that predictions were based partly on retention estimates. In Experiment 2, predictions varied with anticipated test delay (15 min or 2 weeks) whereas comprehension ratings did not, providing further evidence that individuals estimate retention when predicting performance. Analyses of individual differences suggest that both good and poor performers incorporate retention estimates when predicting performance, but better performers do so in a more discriminative manner. Implications for theory of metacognitive judgements are discussed.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Does relocating information in text depend on verbal or visuospatial abilities? An individual-differences analysis.

In this individual-differences study, we evaluated the prevalent view that relocating information in a previously read text depends primarily on visuospatial abilities. Participants read a text, answered fill-in-the-blank test questions, and identified which page and line in the original text contained the sentence in each question. They also completed a battery of verbal and visuospatial tasks. Performance on verbal tasks was highly predictive of the accuracy of both page and line identifications, and this correlation remained significant even after we controlled for performance on visuospatial tasks. In contrast, performance on visuospatial tasks was not predictive of either page or line identification accuracy, once verbal abilities were controlled for. These results suggest an important role for verbal abilities in relocation of text information and a lesser role for visuospatial abilities than has previously been assumed.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

How does background information improve memory for text content?

In two experiments, we investigated whether reading background information benefits memory for text content by influencing the amount of content encoded or the organization of the encoded content. In Experiment 1, half of the participants read background information about the issues to be discussed in the text material, whereas half did not. All the participants were then tested for free recall and cued recall of text content. Free recall was greater for individuals who read issue information than for those who did not. The groups did not differ on cued recall, suggesting that background information did not facilitate the encoding of more text content. Measures of representational organization indicated that increased recall in the issue information group resulted from better organization of content in memory. Experiment 2 extended these findings, using background information about text sources, demonstrated that the efficacy of background information depends on the semantic relationship between that information and text content.

Adult↗