• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >EYE MOVEMENT PATTERNS OF SEMANTIC AND SYNTACTIC ERROR RECOVERY IN DISABLED AND NON-DISABLED READERS.
【24h】

EYE MOVEMENT PATTERNS OF SEMANTIC AND SYNTACTIC ERROR RECOVERY IN DISABLED AND NON-DISABLED READERS.

机译：禁用和非禁用阅读器中的语义和句法错误恢复的眼动模式。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Comprehension monitoring strategies employed by reading-disabled (n = 25) and non-disabled (n = 35) adolescents were compared as they read a series of 20 independent sentences containing either a syntactic or semantic error. Purposes included comparing the two levels of reader on error detection rates, specific error recovery strategies employed, reading component skill variances, basic eye movement patterns (e.g., fixation times), and comprehension theory utilization. The three independent variables included reading level (disabled/non-disabled), two levels of syntactic error (ambiguous/nonambiguous), and two levels of semantic error (anomalous/nonanomalous). Dependent measures included eight eye movement measures, a set of comprehension questions, scores from six tests assessing component skills of reading (decoding, attention, linguistic competencies, STM, sequencing abilities, and spatial skills), as well as a qualitative analysis of eye movement patterns. This 2 x 2 x 2 repeated measures, three-factor mixed design used MANOVA, MANCOVA, ANOVA, multiple regression, Chi Square and Tukey's HSD in data analysis.;Results indicated greater similarity among the two reading groups in error detection and recovery from syntactic and semantic inconsistencies than had been previously reported. Both groups showed equivalent and high levels of error detection under low decoding demands. Seven newly-defined error recovery strategies were consistently exhibited by both disabled and non-disabled readers in similar usage frequencies. Few individual differences were noted. The most frequently employed error recovery patterns by both groups appeared strategic and economical; there was little evidence of disorganized eye movement patterns among either group. Discrepant results between retrospective reports and eye movement measures of detection were found, questioning the validity of the former. Component skill analyses indicated significant group differences, with sequencing ability being an important predictor of both eye movements and comprehension among the two groups. The Garden-Path Theory of Comprehension was partially supported in both groups, although methodological problems in theory support were noted.
机译：比较阅读障碍（n = 25）和非残疾（n = 35）青少年所采用的理解监控策略，因为他们阅读了20个包含句法或语义错误的独立句子。目的包括比较两个级别的阅读器的错误检测率，采用的特定错误恢复策略，阅读组件技能差异，基本眼动模式（例如注视时间）和理解理论的利用率。这三个独立变量包括阅读级别（禁用/非禁用），两个语法错误级别（歧义/明确）和两个语义错误级别（异常/非异常）。相关测量包括八项眼动测量，一组理解问题，六项测验的得分，这些测验评估阅读的组成技能（解码，注意力，语言能力，STM，排序能力和空间技能），以及对眼动的定性分析模式。这种2 x 2 x 2重复测量，三因素混合设计在数据分析中使用了MANOVA，MANCOVA，ANOVA，多元回归，Chi Square和Tukey的HSD;结果表明两个阅读组在错误检测和从句法恢复中的相似性更高和语义上的不一致。两组在低解码需求下均表现出同等且较高水平的错误检测。禁用和非禁用读取器在使用频率相似的情况下，始终如一地展示了七个新定义的错误恢复策略。几乎没有个体差异。两组最常用的错误恢复模式显得既战略又经济。两组中几乎没有证据表明眼球运动模式混乱。回顾性报告与眼动检测指标之间的结果不一致，这质疑了前者的有效性。组件技能分析表明组之间存在显着差异，测序能力是两组眼睛运动和理解能力的重要预测指标。尽管指出了理论支持中的方法论问题，但两组的“花园路径理解理论”均得到部分支持。

著录项

  • 作者

    FLETCHER, JAMES MICHAEL.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Illinois at Chicago, Health Sciences Center.;

  • 授予单位 University of Illinois at Chicago, Health Sciences Center.;
  • 学科 Psychology Clinical.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1986
  • 页码 391 p.
  • 总页数 391
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号