小学生快速阅读的眼动研究

用自然实验和实验室实验考察了对小学四年级学生进行快速阅读训练的有效性,结果发现：（1）快速阅读训练可以显著地提高小学生的有效读速;（2）快速阅读训练可以显著减少注视次数、注视点平均持续时间;（3）快速阅读训练可以显著扩大眼跳距离。     

计算机辅助教学对英语阅读能力的影响

通过回顾与总结CAI英语阅读教学程序由普适化向具体阅读技能转化的发展历程,总结了英语阅读中最重要的能力、技能和主要应解决的问题,阐述了CAI程序对于阅读教学的有效性研究成果:发现相关的CAI程序有五大范畴。最后就教学语言、课程设计、教师对CAI程序的运用等问题进行了探讨与展望。     

小学生外显的说明性文本段落主旨推断学习研究

研究72位不同语文能力的小学五年级男女学生,通过外显的计算机学习软件,运用6种推断策略：主题、细节、综合、主旨方程式、自我提问和文本结构,从没有主题句的说明性文本推断段落主旨的成效。研究发现学生最常用的策略是细节和综合,不同语文能力和性别的学生的学习成效都十分显著。     

初中生元认知阅读策略训练效应的实验研究

采用对比实验的方法,运用自编的元认知阅读策略训练教程对重点中学和普通中学的初二学生进行了训练。结果表明:(1)对初中生进行元认知阅读策略训练能有效地提高其阅读理解成绩;(2)对普通中学初中生进行元认知阅读策略训练的效果优于对重点中学初中生进行训练的效果。     

阅读材料类型和难度对五年级儿童阅读策略的影响

以34名五年级儿童为被试,采用出声思维法考查了阅读材料类型和难度对儿童阅读策略使用情况的影响。结果发现,被试在记叙文阅读过程中使用的阅读策略种类数和总次数均多于说明文。阅读材料难度对于阅读策略种类数和使用次数没有影响。阅读材料类型和难度都对多个阅读策略的使用次数有影响,但是阅读材料类型和难度对于各阅读策略使用次数的影响并不一致。     

高中二年级学生中文阅读知觉广度的眼动研究

采用“呈现随眼动变化技术”对高中二年级学生中文阅读的知觉广度进行了眼动研究。结果发现,高中二年级学生的阅读知觉广度具有不对称性,大约为注视点左侧一个或两个汉字到注视点右侧三个或四个汉字的空间;高中二年级学生在正常阅读中的眼跳距离约为三个汉字的空间,在连续注视的过程中知觉广度有较小范围的重叠。     

Improving reading outcomes for children with learning disabilities: using brief experimental analysis to develop parent-tutoring interventions

The present study assessed the effects of summer parent tutoring on 3 children with learning disabilities using empirically derived reading interventions. Brief experimental analyses were used to identify customized reading fluency interventions. Parents were trained to use the intervention strategies with their children. Parents implemented the procedures during parent-tutoring sessions at home and results were measured continuously in high-word-overlap and low-word-overlap passages to determine whether generalization occurred. Parent and child satisfaction with the procedures was assessed. Results demonstrated generalized increases in reading fluency in both high-word-overlap and low-word-overlap passages as a function of parent tutoring. Also, acceptability ratings by children and their parents indicated that they viewed the interventions as acceptable and effective. Results are discussed in terms of structuring reading fluency interventions that promote generalization and maintenance of treatment effects.     

Cumulative Keyword Index for Volumes 93-95

Individuals with autism frequently show impairments in text reading comprehension. This often is attributed to poor ability to draw inferences during reading and to inadequate access to relevant knowledge. The current study tested this hypothesis by measuring the time taken to read the same question, relating to either physical or social world knowledge, when it was either relevant or irrelevant to the bridging inference evoked by a preceding two-sentence vignette. In the study, 16 normally developing adolescents and 16 adolescents with autism were matched on word reading accuracy, chronological age, and vocabulary but differed significantly in text comprehension. A strong priming effect was found, robust over participants and over items; participants read those questions that were relevant to the inference evoked by the vignette faster than they read those questions that were irrelevant, and no interaction with group membership or type of knowledge was found. This indicates that readers with autism, just like controls, were activating appropriate world knowledge primed by implicit inferences while reading the vignettes. Thus, the comprehension problems in these readers cannot be attributed to an inability to make implicit inferences or to draw on relevant world knowledge. Instead, we suggest that these problems must be sought at a higher level of text processing.     

阅读中文时信息整合的即时性

通过两个实验对中文语篇理解中相关背景信息的激活与整合到底是即时发生抑或延时进行这一问题进行了探讨。研究所用的阅读材料都包含一个目标句,它与局部语境一致,但与前文提供的背景信息冲突或无关。实验一采用自定步速逐行阅读技术,考察了一致性条件以及句子结束的标记（即句号）是否存在对目标句阅读时间的影响。结果发现,句子结束的标记是否存在并不影响目标句整合加工的进行。实验二运用眼动追踪技术着重探讨信息整合加工能否在目标句关键区中即时进行,实验条件仍为当前信息与背景信息的一致性,重点考察其对目标句中关键前区、关键区及关键后区的作用。结果表明,自变量的操纵导致关键区中反映初次加工的指标产生可靠的效应。这一结果表明中文语篇理解中整合加工的过程开始得非常迅速,是一个即时引发、而非延时进行的过程     

Social priming of dyslexia and reduction of the Stroop effect: What component of the Stroop effect is actually reduced?

Recently, Goldfarb, Aisenberg, and Henik (2011) showed that in a manual format of the Stroop task, dyslexia priming eliminates the normal magnitude of the interference-based Stroop-like findings otherwise exhibited by individuals participating in such research. Goldfarb et al. (2011) consequently concluded that the effect of word reading in a Stroop task (i.e., one automatic behavior) can be effectively controlled through an automatic instruction “do not read” (i.e., another automatic behavior). The present study further investigated these ideas by examining when and how dyslexia priming controls different processes involved in a Stroop task. To this end, the original finding was first replicated (Experiment 1) and subsequently extended to the vocal (instead of manual) response modality to examine whether previously reported eliminations of the Stroop effect persist with this response format (i.e., format producing larger Stroop effects). Since past work (e.g., Augustinova & Ferrand, 2012a; Brown, Joneleit et al., 2002; Ferrand & Augustinova, 2013) had suggested that various interventions were likely to reduce (rather than eliminate) the interference-based Stroop-like findings with vocal responses, a further aim of these experiments was to identify the component of these findings that dyslexia priming actually reduces. To this end, the effects of this intervention were examined in a more fine-grained variant of the Stroop task that distinguished between interference resulting from task-irrelevant processes involved in computing the lexical and semantic representations of the word (i.e., a written distractor to ignore) and task-relevant processes involved in the selection of a response (i.e., a color target to name) that are both involved in this task. In line with our past work (e.g., Augustinova & Ferrand, 2012a; Ferrand & Augustinova, 2013), the results of two experiments (Experiments 2 and 3) showed that in the vocal format, dyslexia priming reduces but does not eliminate the normal magnitude of the interference-based Stroop-like findings and that this reduction is solely due to the control of processes involved in the selection of a response (i.e., a color target to name) – processes that are known to be controllable in this format (Ferrand & Augustinova, 2013). Given that in this format, dyslexia priming had no effect on task-irrelevant processes involved in computing the lexical and semantic representations of a written distractor to be ignored – processes that are known to be automatic – further implications for the control of automatic processes via dyslexia priming are considered and an interpretation in terms of a unitary control mechanism for both the manual and vocal formats is proposed.