Cited by 342Reading and Literacy DevelopmentVisual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesEducational Strategies and Epistemologies

Reading both high-coherence and low-coherence texts: Effects of text sequence and prior knowledge.

McNamara, Danielle S.·2001·Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale

Abstract

Previous research (e.g., McNamara, Kintsch, Songer, & Kintsch, 1996) has demonstrated that high-knowledge readers learn more from low-coherence than high-coherence texts. This study further examined the assumption that this advantage is due to the use of knowledge to fill in the gaps in the text, resulting in an integration of the text with prior knowledge. Participants read either a high- or low-coherence text twice, or they read both the high- and low-coherence texts in one order or the other. Reading the low-coherence text first should force the reader to use prior knowledge to fill in the conceptual gaps. However, reading the high-coherence text first was predicted to negate the necessity of using prior knowledge to understand the low-coherence text when the latter was presented second. As predicted, high-knowledge readers benefited from the low-coherence only text when it was read first. Low-knowledge readers benefited from the high-coherence text, regardless of whether it was read first, second, or twice.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/h0087352

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McNamara, D. S.
Affiliations
Old Dominion University (US)
Corresponding author
McNamara, Danielle S.
Venue
Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale
Published
2001-03
Volume
55
Issue
1
Pages
51-62
ISSN
  • 1196-1961 (ISSN-L)
  • 1878-7290
OpenAlex
W1968199915
Cited by
342
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 19
FWCI
8.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Keywords
text coherence, prior knowledge, reading comprehension, text integration
MeSH terms
Cognition, Humans, Random Allocation, Reading, Semantics, Time Factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review