Assessing short summaries with human judgments procedure and latent semantic analysis in narrative and expository texts

In the present study, we tested a computer-based procedure for assessing very concise summaries (50 words long) of two types of text (narrative and expository) using latent semantic analysis (LSA) in comparison with the judgments of four human experts. LSA was used to estimate semantic similarity using six different methods: four holistic (summary-text, summary-summaries, summary-expert summaries, and pregraded-ungraded summary) and two componential (summary-sentence text and summary-main sentence text). A total of 390 Spanish middle and high school students (14–16 years old) and six experts read a narrative or expository text and later summarized it. The results support the viability of developing a computerized assessment tool using human judgments and LSA, although the correlation between human judgments and LSA was higher in the narrative text than in the expository, and LSA correlated more with human content ratings than with human coherence ratings. Finally, the holistic methods were found to be more reliable than the componential methods analyzed in this study.