바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.22 No.2
Citation Share

Investigating Individual differences in Reading Comprehension Ability by using Cognitive Tasks

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2010, v.22 no.2, pp.233-245
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2010.22.2.007


& (2010). Investigating Individual differences in Reading Comprehension Ability by using Cognitive Tasks. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 22(2), 233-245, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2010.22.2.007
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

We investigated some language comprehension tasks whether they can be used as psychometric tests(or assessment tools). An exploratory experiment were performed to examine lexical processing times by using lexical decision & sentence verification tasks. Used experimental variables were numbers of syllable, frequency, phonological change, & typicality. We analysed the results by using ANOVA, estimated omega square, generalizability coefficients, and factor analysis in order to examine treatment effects, explained variance, and the reliability and validity of experimental results. All these result suggested the experimental variables and tasks that we used could be good psychometric tests. We discussed some limitations of this study.

keywords
cognitive tasks, reading comprehension, individual differences, lexical processes, 인지과제, 독서이해, 개인차, 어휘처리

Reference

1.

김청택 (2002). 개인차분석법을 이용한 실험결과의 통계적 분석의 확장. 한국심리학회지: 실험 및 인지, 14, 107-126.

2.

남기춘 (1997). 한글 단어 재인에서의 단어 길이 효과. 한국심리학회지: 실험 및 인지, 9, 1-18.

3.

이관용 (1991). 우리말 범주규준 조사. 본보기산출빈도, 전형성, 그리고 세부특징 조사. 한국심리학회지: 실험 및 인지, 9, 73-94.

4.

이양 (1998). 한글 단어 지각에서 표음식도와 처리자원의 영향. 한국심리학회지: 실험 및 인지, 10, 1-16.

5.

이정모 외 (2003). 인지심리학. 학지사.

6.

조명한 외 (2003). 언어심리학. 학지사.

7.

최광일 (2007). 독서이해 과정의 개인차: 인지과제 수행과 안구운동 패턴. 아주대 박사학위논문.

8.

홍세희 (2000). 구조 방정식 모형의 적합도 지수 선정기준과 그 근거. 한국심리학회지: 임상, 19, 161-177.

9.

Clark, H. H. (1973). The language as fixed effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 335-359.

10.

Cronach, l. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671-684.

11.

Di Nocera, F., Ferlazzo, F., & Borghi, V. (2001). G theory and the reliability of psychophysiological measures: A Tutorial. Psychophysiology, 38, 796-806.

12.

Hannon, B., & Daneman, M. (2001) A new tool for measuring and understanding individual differences in the component processes of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93. 103-128.

13.

Hyöna, J., Lorch, R. F., & Kaakinen, J. K. (2002). Individual differences in reading to summarize expository text: Evidence from eye fixation patterns. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 44-45.

14.

King, J & Just M. A. (1991). Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 580-602.

15.

Kintsch, K., & Rawson, K, A.(2005). Comprehension. In Snowling, M, J., & Hulme. C. (Eds). The Science of Reading (pp. 209-226). Malden, MA; Blacwell.

16.

Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

17.

Perfetti, C. A., & Tan, L. H. (1999). The consistency model of Chinese word identification. In J. Wang, A. Inhoff, A. W. Chen, & H. C. Chen (Eds). Orthography, Phonology, morphology, and meaning(pp. 115-134). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

18.

Perfetti, C, A., Landi, N., & Oakhill. J. (2005). The Acquistion of Reading Comprehension Skill. In Snowling, M, J., & Hulme. C. (Eds). The Science of Reading (pp. 227-247). Malden, MA; Blacwell.

19.

Shaelson, R. J. & Webb, N. M. (1991). Generalizability theory: A Primer. London: Sage.

20.

Sternberg R. J. & Ben-Zeev, T. (2001). Complex cognition. New York: Oxford.

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy