Cited by 97Reading and Literacy DevelopmentNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismAging and Gerontology Research

Age differences in rereading

Open access
Stine-Morrow, Elizabeth A. L., Gagne, Danielle D., Morrow, Daniel G., DeWall, Barbara Herman·2004·Memory & Cognition

Abstract

Younger and older adults read a series of expository and narrative passages twice in order to answer comprehension questions. Reading time was used to index attentional allocation to word, textbase, and situation model processing and to assess shifts in the allocation policy from the first to the second reading. Older readers' comprehension was at least as good as that of younger readers. Analysis of reading times suggested that for both genres, older adults allocated more attention to situation model features than younger adults did on the first reading, whereas young and old allocated attention similarly to this level of representation on the second reading, suggesting that mature readers may give greater priority to situation model construction when first encountering text. Also, for both genres, older adults showed relatively less facilitation than the young in word-level processing in rereading, suggesting that representation at this level is not as firmly established during reading or decays more quickly for older readers. For narrative texts only, this pattern also obtained for textbase processing. Collectively, these data show that age equivalence in text comprehension at the molar level may be accomplished through different processing routes at the molecular level.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3758/bf03195860

Cites

88 of 88 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Little, D. M. (2001). Age and attentional constraints on the encoding and recall of spoken discourse. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Brandeis University.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stine-Morrow, E. A. L., Gagne, D. D., Morrow, D. G., & DeWall, B. H.
Affiliations
  • University of New Hampshire (US)
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
Venue
Memory & Cognition
Published
2004-07
Volume
32
Issue
5
Pages
696-710
ISSN
  • 0090-502X (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5946
OpenAlex
W2049841721
Cited by
97
References
84
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
10.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Memory & Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (R01AG013935, R01 AG13935)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
Keywords
re-reading, aging, older adults, situation model, textbase, word-level processing, reading comprehension, attention allocation, expository texts, narrative texts, reading time, age differences
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Attention, Cognition, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Periodicity, Reading, 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