Additive Effects From Interspersed Adjunct Questions In Prose Text / Sabato D. Sagaria and Francis J. Di Vesta.

A total of 150 undergraduate students randomly assigned to five experimental groups studied ten paragraphs with questions interspersed at different locations in the text. Performance on incidental items was significantly lower (p < .05) in the question before (QB) than in the question after (QA),...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Online Access: Full Text (via ERIC)
Main Authors: Sagaria, Sabato D., Di Vesta, Francis J. (Author)
Format: eBook
Language:English
Published: [Place of publication not identified] : Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse, 1977.
Subjects:

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002u 4500
001 b6371590
003 CoU
005 20191031133227.9
006 m o d f
007 cr |||||||||||
008 770101s1977 xx |||| o ||| s eng d
035 |a (ERIC)ed137733 
035 |a (MvI) 9S000000130628 
040 |a ericd  |b eng  |c MvI  |d MvI 
099 |a ED137733 
100 1 |a Sagaria, Sabato D. 
245 1 0 |a Additive Effects From Interspersed Adjunct Questions In Prose Text /  |c Sabato D. Sagaria and Francis J. Di Vesta. 
264 1 |a [Place of publication not identified] :  |b Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse,  |c 1977. 
300 |a 19 pages. 
336 |a text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent. 
337 |a microform  |b h  |2 rdamedia. 
338 |a microfiche  |b he  |2 rdacarrier. 
520 |a A total of 150 undergraduate students randomly assigned to five experimental groups studied ten paragraphs with questions interspersed at different locations in the text. Performance on incidental items was significantly lower (p < .05) in the question before (QB) than in the question after (QA), question before and after (QBA), and the no-question (NoQ) groups. Performance on intentional items by the QB subjects was significantly lower (p < .05) than the QA and QBA subjects. The results also suggest that (a) the QB and QA effects of questions combine additively to produce the performance of the QBA subjects, and (b) the attention operation is equivalent across conditions for intentional items, but differs in retention operation. This may mean that depth-of-processing is the relevant operation to focus upon. (Author) 
650 0 7 |a Advance Organizers.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Attention Control.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a College Students.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Higher Education.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Learning Processes.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Prose.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Reading Research.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Recall (Psychology)  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Retention (Psychology)  |2 ericd. 
700 1 |a Di Vesta, Francis J.,  |e author. 
700 1 |a Di Vesta, Francis J. 
856 4 0 |u http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED137733.pdf  |z Full Text (via ERIC) 
907 |a .b63715909  |b 11-24-21  |c 10-15-10 
998 |a web  |b 10-23-12  |c f  |d m   |e -  |f eng  |g xx   |h 0  |i 1 
956 |a ERIC 
999 f f |i 61d247ec-0b0d-5a69-b13c-430b2fc46f40  |s fc1e3460-8751-5121-9ef3-a1c91045e2f4 
952 f f |p Can circulate  |a University of Colorado Boulder  |b Online  |c Online  |d Online  |e ED137733  |h Other scheme  |i web  |n 1