Journal of Reading Behavior
1993, Volume 25, No. 1
A CAUSAL MODEL OF SENTENCE RECALL:
EFFECTS OF FAMILIARITY, CONCRETENESS,
COMPREHENSIBILITY, AND INTERESTINGNESS
Mark Sadoski, Ernest T. Goetz, and Joyce B. Fritz
Texas A&M University
ABSTRACT
This study presents and tests a theoretically derived causal model of the recall of
sentences. One group of undergraduate students rated 40 sentences about historical
characters for content familiarity, concreteness, comprehensibility, and interestingness. A second group read the sentences and provided written recalls immediately after reading and again after five days. Using predictions derived from
schema theory and from dual coding theory, a causal model was derived that
identified familiarity and concreteness as causes of comprehensibility; familiarity,
concreteness, and comprehensibility as causes of interestingness; and all the
identified variables as causes of both immediate and delayed recall. Path analysis
procedures indicated that concreteness strongly affected comprehensibility and
recall, and that both concreteness and familiarity affected interestingness. The
results suggest support for a dual coding theory account of sentence comprehension
and recall.
From both theoretical and practical perspectives, the contributions of familiarity, concreteness, comprehensibility, and interestingness to the learning of text are
central issues in reading research. Considerable previous research has probed each
of these variables, either to investigate basic processes in reading or to investigate
the design of text. However, very few studies have examined these variables together or have drawn on established theories to provide hypotheses for forming
and testing causal models in this area (e.g., Sadoski, 1984).
This study presents a test of a causal model for readers' recall of individual
sentences using contrasting variables derived from schema theory (e.g., Anderson
& Pearson, 1984) and dual coding theory (Paivio, 1986). Both theories have generated predictions regarding the comprehensibility and interestingness of text and the
5
Downloaded from jlr.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 16, 2016
Journal of Reading Behavior
6
consequent effect of these variables on the memorability of text. Specifically, the
model in this study tests the effects of readers' ratings of (a) the familiarity of
sentence content and (b) the concreteness of the sentences, on their ratings of (c)
the comprehensibility of the sentences and (d) the interestingness of the sentences.
The model then tests those four variables for effects on (e) the immediate and
delayed recall of those sentences by a separate group of readers from the same
population.
Theoretical Background
Comprehension and recall. An extensive literature on schema theory leads
to the prediction that familiarity with the content of text material will affect its
comprehensibility and memorability. Anderson and Pearson (1984) provide detailed
accounts of how individual words and sentences might activate abstract knowledge
structures in the reader. For example, the set of words driver, trap, rough, and
handicap, taken together, would activate a golf schema (Ross & Bower, 1981,
cited in Anderson & Pearson, 1984, p. 261). The reader's knowledge of golf and
consequent familiarity with its vocabulary results in comprehensibility for those
otherwise ambiguous words. Schemata are theorized to be abstractions derived
from real or vicarious experiences that become instantiated during reading when a
particular context (e.g., sentence or longer text) of familiar words is encountered.
The instantiation of a schema also directly affects recall by providing a plan for
retrieval from memory. Anderson and Pearson note that several studies have shown
that the longer the interval between reading and recall, the greater the effects of
the readers' schemata. Hence, schema theory may predict that the effects of content
familiarity would be even greater for delayed recall than for immediate recall.
Dual coding theory predicts that information encoded mentally in two ways
should be better comprehended and recalled than information encoded in only one
way (Paivio, 1986). Dual coding theory asserts that cognition consists of two
separate but interconnected systems, a verbal system specialized for processing
language and a nonverbal system for processing world knowledge of objects and
events. When information is encoded as language and also nonverbally (e.g., as
images), the information is elaborated, providing increased comprehension, and
strengthening the memory trace. Because concrete language easily evokes integrated mental images (e.g., black stallion), it has a natural advantage over abstract
language (e.g., basic assumption). Generally, dual coding theory assumes that the
verbal and nonverbal codes are additive in effect, and predicts that information
likely to be dual coded (i.e., concrete language) should be recalled about twice as
much as information more likely to be single coded (i.e., abstract language). Dual
coding theory presently makes no strong prediction about the rate of forgetting.
However, some research suggests that while verbal recall of story episodes is
significantly reduced after 48 hours, reports of images of story episodes are not
Downloaded from jlr.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 16, 2016
Causal Model
7
(Sadoski, Goetz, Olivarez, Lee, & Roberts, 1990). Hence, the recall advantage of
text information encoded as images may be greater for delayed recall than for
immediate recall.
A recent theoretical analysis of sentence memory by Kintsch and his colleagues
is relevant to these predictions (Kintsch, Welsch, Shmalhofer, & Zimny, 1990).
This analysis suggests that discourse is stored in memory at three levels: (a) surface
level verbatim information, (b) the propositional text base (micropropositions and
macropropositions), and (c) the situation model of the text constructed by the reader
(cf. Kintsch, 1988; Perrig & Kintsch, 1985; van Dijk & Kintsch, 1983). The
strength in memory of each of these levels increases from (a) to (c); that is, the
situation model is stronger in memory than either the text base or the surface level.
Kintsch et al. (1990) present empirical evidence in support of this analysis. Results
of sentence recognition tests designed to access each of the three levels indicated
that memory for the situation model was strong both immediately after reading and
after four days, whereas memory for the text base and verbatim levels was strong
immediately after reading and declined considerably after 4 days. Although Kintsch
et al., concluded that the nature of situation models is not as yet well understood,
they allowed that situation models can be experienced as images (cf. Perrig &
Kintsch). Following logically from this analysis, text content stored as situation
models in the form of imagery should be more available in memory than text
information not stored as imagery both immediately and after several days, as
predicted by dual coding theory. Sadoski, Paivio, and Goetz (1991) have compared
the van Dijk and Kintsch model, as elaborated by Perrig and Kintsch, to dual
coding theory. Their analysis suggests that since surface level and text base representations are verbal, if situation models are assumed to be stored as images, then
the van Dijk and Kintsch model is essentially congruent with dual coding theory.
Interestingness. Some predictions regarding the relationship between interestingness and comprehension and recall in reading have been made by schema theory.
Asher (1980) reviewed studies of interest and comprehension in reading and concluded that high-interest material is comprehended better than low-interest material
(cf. Anderson, Mason, & Shirey, 1984). One theoretical explanation offered was
that readers may have more familiarity with the vocabulary of high-interest topics
and more elaborate schemata for high-interest topics. Thus, reader familiarity might
be seen as a cause of the comprehensibility of a text and also its interestingness.
Although no specific causal path between comprehensibility and interestingness
was specified, Asher's discussion suggested that familiarity and comprehension are
prerequisites of finding a passage interesting.
Dual coding theory postulates that affective responses, being nonverbal by
definition, must be identified theoretically with the nonverbal system and would be
expected to accompany nonverbal cognitive reactions such as imagery. Paivio
(1986) expressed a preference for the traditional viewpoint that affective responses
follow cognitive interpretations, but allowed that the reverse could be the case
Downloaded from jlr.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 16, 2016
8
Journal of Reading Behavior
without violating any of the theory's general assumptions. In reading, however,
some degree of comprehension would presumably take place before affective responses occurred.
The foregoing theoretical predictions were used to generate a causal model for
empirical test. Content familiarity and concreteness were cast as potential causes
of comprehensibility and interestingness, with comprehensibility preceding interestingness in the causal chain. These four variables were then cast as potential causes
of both immediate and delayed recall. No causal relationship between concreteness
and familiarity was assumed.
METHOD
Measurement Issues
Reliability and validity of measurement are critical in causal modeling (Pedhazur, 1982). Two types of measurement were employed in this study, rating scales
and written recalls. Rating scales have proven reliable and valid indices of constructs once thought too vague or subjective for empirical research (e.g., interpretability, metaphoricity, imageability, emotional response, learnability). Rating
scales for such constructs have regularly been shown to produce alpha reliability
coefficients exceeding .9, and have found support from various types of validity
checks. For example, Katz, Paivio, and Marschark (1985) had college students
rate metaphors for comprehensibility, familiarity, imageability, interpretability, and
degree of metaphoricity, along with five other ratings. All of these ratings produced
alpha reliabilities of .95 or higher and loaded on a single metaphoricity factor with
the other ratings, indicating both reliability and construct validity. Using stories,
Sadoski, Goetz, and Kangiser (1988) had students rate, by paragraph, the degree
of mental imagery evoked, the degree of emotion evoked, and the degree of importance to the story as a whole. Alpha coefficients exceeded .95 for all three ratings.
In that study, the undergraduate students were also able to describe in detail the
images experienced, the emotions experienced, and reasons for rating a paragraph
as important, thereby establishing a degree of criterion-related validity for the
ratings.
To determine the construct validity of such ratings, Goetz, Sadoski, and Olivarez (1991) used the ratings of one group of undergraduates for story paragraphs
on scales for imagery, affect, and importance as predictors of the imagery reports
and verbal recalls of the same story by another group. Findings showed that imagery
ratings were highly significant predictors of the imagery reports of a separate group
of readers. Imagery ratings, as well as importance ratings and affect ratings, were
also highly significant predictors of verbal recall. The regression analyses used
ensured that the effects could not be attributed to surface level text factors (e.g.,
Downloaded from jlr.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 16, 2016
Causal Model
9
number of syllables, words, sentences, or propositions) because the variance attributable to these factors was eliminated prior to testing the effects of the ratings.
Britton, Van Dusen, Gulgoz, Glynn, and Sharp (1991) found that one undergraduate group's ratings for the learnability of original versions of texts and rewritten
versions of those texts predicted the recall of those texts by another group of
students with 95% accuracy, further providing evidence of criterion-related validity.
In the present study, ratings were used to determine the content familiarity,
concreteness (imageability), comprehensibility, and interestingness of 40 sentences. The reliability of each rating scale was assessed. Immediate and delayed
recall of the sentences was measured by a second group of subjects. Immediate
recall was also used as a validity test for comprehension ratings (further analyses
of these data are presented in Sadoski, Goetz, & Fritz, in press).
Subjects
One hundred and one undergraduate education students from a large Southwestern university participated in this study as part of a course in reading education.
Participation was part of the course activities and no additional credit or compensation was provided. The students were upper-class juniors and seniors; 86 were
female and 15 were male.
Materials
Ten historical characters that varied in familiarity were selected from history
textbooks and/or historical books and articles. The characters represented a variety
of historical eras and fields of endeavor. Using sentences from the original texts
as sources, four factually accurate sentences were written for each character (40
total). Two sentences for each character were written in more concrete language,
and two were written in more abstract language. The concrete and abstract sentence
sets were equated for readability (mean syllables and words per sentence). The
sentences were approximately 25 words long and each contained approximately 43
syllables. Idea units were also equated in the two sets, with each set having 94
idea units. Idea units were determined grammatically, with each independent clause
kernel, or instance of modification of an element of a clause kernel (discounting
determiners, connectives, etc.), counted as an idea unit. The full name of the
character began each sentence. Samples of the abstract and concrete sentences for
two characters are exhibited in Appendix A.
Procedure
A group of 22 students rated each of the 40 sentences on four 1-7 bipolar
scales. The scales were: (a) content familiarity (1 = "not familiar to me in content"
Downloaded from jlr.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 16, 2016
10
Journal of Reading Behavior
to 7 = "very familiar to me in content"), (b) concreteness (1 = "very abstract, hard
for me to form mental images of this" to 7 = "very concrete, easy for me to
form mental images of this"), (c) comprehensibility (l = "very hard for me to
understand" to 7 = "very easy for me to understand"), and (d) interestingness
(1 = "not interesting to me" to 7 = "very interesting to me"). The sentences about
each character were presented in groups of four in booklets counterbalanced by
order of characters and by order of concrete and abstract sentences within each
character. Ratings were done on separate sheets during a regular class session.
A second group of 79 students was administered the 40 sentences for recall.
Each student read and recalled a subset of 20 sentences that were presented as
two-sentence biographical paragraphs about each of the 10 characters. The number
of students reading and recalling each of the 40 sentences was equated. Sentences
were presented in booklets with counterbalancing procedures similar to those used
for the ratings. Immediately after reading the booklets, students provided written
recalls in a second booklet in which each character name was provided at the top
of a blank page. Five days later, students received an identical booklet and again
provided written recalls. Order of character presentation in the recall booklets was
the same as for the original order of presentation of the sentences. All procedures
were carried out in two regular class sessions.
RESULTS
Ratings
Alpha reliability coefficients exceeded .9 for all four ratings. Overall means
and standard deviations for the ratings were: familiarity, M = 3.97, SD= 1.04;
concreteness, Af = 5.60, SZ> = .90, comprehensibility, M = 6.00, SD = .67; and interestingness, M = 5.13, SD= .66. Unless otherwise noted, all significant effects
reported below exceeded p<.0001; effects reported as nonsignificant failed at
p>.05. A 2 X 10 MANOVA was performed with sentence concreteness and historical characters as independent variables and the four ratings as dependent variables.
Significant main effects were found for sentence concreteness, F(4, 396) = 56.93,
and for historical characters, F(36, 1486) = 8.65. The interaction was not significant. Univariate ANOVAs determined that the sentences in the concrete set were
rated significantly higher than the sentences in the abstract set on all ratings except
familiarity, where the difference was not significant. Significant univariate differences were also found among the 10 historical characters on all four ratings. Of
particular interest here is a post hoc Dunn's test of the familiarity rating. This test
revealed two nonoverlapping groups of characters, with the sentences about one
group of 5 characters rated significantly more familiar than the sentences about the
other 5 characters (p<.05). These results provide: (a) a validity check that the
Downloaded from jlr.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 16, 2016
Causal Model
11
manipulations of the sentences for concreteness and familiarity were successful,
(b) evidence that the variables in the hypothesized causal chain did not significantly
interact in the sentence ratings, and (c) evidence that adequate reliability and variation existed in all ratings to provide adequate statistical precision and power.
Recall
Gist recall was scored by idea units. Two independent raters coded a randomly
selected 10% of the protocols (immediate and delayed). Interrater proportion of
agreement was .90. Proportions of both immediate gist recall (M= .32, SD= .18)
and delayed gist recall (M= .21, SD= .14) were used in the analysis of the causal
model. Immediate gist recall, commonly used as a comprehension measure in
reading research, was also used as a validity check on the ratings for comprehensibility. A significant correlation of .70 was found between comprehensibility and
immediate recall.
Path Analysis
The causal model was formulated as described above. Path analysis procedures
using least-squares multiple regression and beta weights as path coefficients were
carried out as described by Pedhazur (1982). The model with its resulting path
coefficients and zero-order correlations is exhibited in Figure 1. Zero-order correlations greater than .30 are significant (p<.05). The regression of comprehensibility
on familiarity and concreteness yielded a significant R of .91. The regression
of interestingness on familiarity, concreteness, and comprehensibility yielded a
significant R of .91. The regression of immediate recall on all four ratings yielded
a significant R of .76. The regression of delayed recall on all four ratings yielded
a significant R of .68.
In path analysis, direct effects are indicated by the path coefficients and indirect
effects are indicated by the products of the path coefficients comprising the indirect
paths. The sum of the direct and indirect effects is the effect coefficient (Pedhazur,
1982). As an example, the direct effect of concreteness on interestingness is seen
in its path coefficient of .06. However, concreteness also exerts an indirect effect
on interestingness through comprehensibility. This indirect effect is calculated by
multiplying the direct effect of concreteness on comprehensibility (.91) by the
direct effect of comprehensibility on interestingness (.51). Hence, .91 x .51 = .46.
The sum of the direct effect (.06) plus the indirect effect (.46) is the effect coefficient. Hence, .06+.46 =.52. Both direct effects and effect coefficients can be
compared in interpreting the relative influence of variables.
Concreteness had the most influence on comprehensibility in this model. The
direct effect of concreteness on comprehensibility was .91, whereas the direct effect
of familiarity on comprehensibility was virtually nil (.01). That is, virtually all
Downloaded from jlr.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 16, 2016
12
Journal of Reading Behavior
Figure 1. Path model of sentence ratings and recall. Numbers in parentheses are
zero-order correlations, other numbers are path coefficients. For the
paths to recall, numbers above the line refer to immediate recall and
numbers below the line refer to delayed recall.
the shared variation of familiarity and comprehensibility could be explained by
concreteness.
The influences on interestingness are slightly more complex. As demonstrated
in the example above, the effect coefficient for concreteness on interestingness is
.52, with almost all of this being an indirect effect through comprehensibility. The
effect coefficient for familiarity on interestingness is .56, with almost all of this
being a direct effect. Hence, concreteness and familiarity are approximately equal
in influencing interestingness in this model, but the effect for familiarity is direct,
and the effect for concreteness is indirect, through comprehensibility.
Concreteness had the most influence on immediate recall in this model. The
effect coefficient for concreteness on immediate recall was .67, with most of this
being accounted for by the direct effect of concreteness (.44). An indirect effect
of .15 was contributed by the path from concreteness to comprehensibility to interestingness to immediate recall. Still smaller indirect effects were found in the
paths from concreteness to comprehensibility to immediate recall (.06) and from
concreteness to interestingness to immediate recall (.02). In contrast, the effect
coefficient for familiarity on immediate recall was .15. The direct effect of familiarity was — .03, and the indirect effect in the path from familiarity to interestingness
to immediate recall (.18) accounted for the rest of the effect coefficient. Comparing
Downloaded from jlr.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 16, 2016
Causal Model
13
effect coefficients, concreteness is about 4V2 times as effective as familiarity in
directly and indirectly influencing immediate recall in this model.
Concreteness also had the most influence on delayed recall in this model. The
effect coefficient for concreteness on delayed recall was nearly identical to the
direct effect (.57 vs. .58, respectively), indicating virtually no indirect effects. The
effect coefficient for familiarity on delayed recall was .23, only slightly larger than
its direct effect (.18), indicating only small indirect effects for familiarity as well.
That is, the direct effects of concreteness and familiarity on delayed recall can
be compared with little regard to indirect effects through comprehensibility or
interestingness alone, or through comprehensibility and interestingness in sequence.
This comparison indicates that concreteness was about 2V2 times as effective as
familiarity in directly influencing delayed recall in this model.
DISCUSSION
Interpretation of causal models must be approached with caution. A causal
model is only as sound as the theory that generates it, and the findings of path
analysis are only as reliable and valid as the measurement of the variables included
(Pedhazur, 1982). Established theories generated the causal predictions included in
this model. Rating scales proved to be highly reliable indices of the constructs
measured here, and a substantial degree of validity can be claimed for them from
previous research and the findings of this study. Ratings also provided for equivalent, direct comparisons between variables. Recall protocols have also evinced high
reliability and accepted validity in reading research. However, we acknowledge
the limitations of these, and, in fact, all of our present measures of reading, knowing, and remembering. Further limitations on these findings include the use of
upperclass undergraduate university students reading relatively long sentences
about historical characters. The reading of longer text units presumably involves
text effects not taken into account here.
Given these limitations, the results appear to provide considerable support for
the predictions of dual coding theory, but appear to provide less support for the
predictions of schema theory. Concreteness, defined here as ease of forming mental
images, exceeded content familiarity in affecting both comprehensibility and recall.
Concreteness explained virtually all the relationship between familiarity and comprehensibility, suggesting that concrete language strongly mediates the connection
between existing knowledge representations and text information. These findings
are consistent with the dual coding theory prediction that information coded both
verbally and as images is rendered more comprehensible and more memorable, and
that concrete language enjoys a natural advantage over abstract language. These
findings are also consistent with other research in this area using different methodologies. For example, O'Neill and Paivio (1978) found that the random exchange of
Downloaded from jlr.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 16, 2016
14
Journal of Reading Behavior
words between sentences was more disruptive to the comprehensibility of concrete
sentences than abstract sentences, and that concrete sentences were recalled better
than abstract sentences even when disrupted. The researchers concluded that their
results suggested an inherent vagueness in abstract language, rendering it more
difficult to comprehend and remember.
A dual coding interpretation also explains the sentence recognition results of
Kintsch et al. (1990) if it is assumed that situation models can be images of the
content of the sentences whereas other sentence information is stored in a verbal
code. Kintsch (1988) has recently postulated a construction-integration model of
discourse comprehension which contends that highly structured schemata are untenable. He argues instead for a much more flexible and minimally organized knowledge system in which structure is not prestored, but generated in the context of the
task for which it is needed. Although there are certain differences between the
construction-integration model and dual coding theory, the necessity for elaborate
background schemata for the comprehension of discourse is questioned by both.
That is, both maintain that comprehension is constructive and may occur without
schemata, although some general background knowledge of the content would be
necessary.
Presumably, the students in the present study had sufficient general background
knowledge representations of the content of the sentences because they rated both
concrete and abstract sentences as quite comprehensible and moderately familiar
and interesting, and were able to recall elements of their gist after 5 days. Some
support for a prediction from schema theory was found in that familiarity had both
a larger effect coefficient and a larger direct effect on delayed recall than on
immediate recall. Also, content familiarity had a moderate effect on interestingness.
This is partially consistent with Asher's (1980) contention that familiarity affects
comprehension and interest in reading. Concreteness, however, appears to stimulate
the comprehension of sentences and thereby exerts an indirect effect on interestingness. Furthermore, concreteness had much larger direct and indirect effects on
both immediate and delayed recall than familiarity, comprehensibility, and interestingness.
Overall, these findings support the contention that dual coding theory provides
a viable alternative explanation to schema theory for sentence comprehension and
recall (Sadoski, Paivio, & Goetz, 1991). These results deserve replication and
extension using longer text units, different measures, and different populations,
especially younger readers. Continued theoretical and empirical investigations of
the effect of interest on reading and learning are also warranted.
REFERENCES
Anderson, R. C., Mason, J. M., & Shirey, L. (1984). The reading group: An experimental investigation
of a labyrinth. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 6-38.
Downloaded from jlr.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 16, 2016
Causal Model
15
Anderson, R. C , & Pearson, P. D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading
comprehension. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of
reading research (pp. 255-292). New York: Longman.
Asher, S. R. (1980). Topic interest in children's reading comprehension. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce,
& W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 525-534). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Britton, B. K., Van Dusen, L., Gulgoz, S., Glynn, S. M., & Sharp, L. (1991). Accuracy of learnability
judgements for instructional texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 43-47.
Goetz, E. T., Sadoski, M., & Olivarez, A. (1991). Getting a reading on reader response: Relationships
between imagery, affect, and importance ratings, recall, and imagery reports. Reading Psychology,
12, 13-26.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration
model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.
Kintsch, W., Welsch, D., Schmalhofer, F., & Zimny, S. (1990). Sentence memory: A theoretical
analysis. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 133-159.
Katz, A. N., Paivio, A., & Marschark, M. (1985). Poetic comparisons: Psychological dimensions of
metaphoric processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 14, 365-383.
O'Neill, B. J., & Paivio, A. (1978). Some consequences of violating selection restrictions in concrete
and abstract sentences. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 32, 3-18.
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Pedhazur, E. J. (1982). Multiple regression behavioral research. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Perrig, W., & Kintsch W. (1985). Propositional and situational representations of text. Journal of
Memory and Language, 24, 503-518.
Ross, B. H., & Bower, G. H. (1981). Comparisons of models of associative recall. Memory and
Cognition, 9, 1-16.
Sadoski, M. (1984). Text structure, imagery, and affect in the recall of a story by children. In J. A.
Niles & L. A. Harris (Eds.), Changing perspectives in research in reading/language processing
and instruction. Thirty-third Yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 48-53). Washington, DC: National Reading Conference.
Sadoski, M., Goetz, E. T., & Fritz, J. B. (in press). The impact of concreteness on comprehensibility,
interest, and memory for text: Implications for dual coding theory and text design. Journal of
Educational Psychology.
Sadoski, M., Goetz, E. T., & Kangiser, S. (1988). Imagination in story response: Relationships between
imagery, affect, and structural importance. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 320-336.
Sadoski, M., Goetz, E. T., Olivarez, A., Lee, S., & Roberts, N. M. (1990). Imagination in story
reading: The role of imagery, verbal recall, story analysis, and processing levels. Journal of
Reading Behavior, 22, 55-70.
Sadoski, M., Paivio, A., & Goetz, E. T. (1991). A critique of schema theory in reading and a dual
coding alternative. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 463-484.
van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic
Press.
APPENDIX A
Abstract (A) and Concrete (C) Sentences for a More Familiar Character
(Sandra Day O'Connor) and a Less Familiar Character (Robespierre)
Sandra Day O'Connor was a judge at the intermediate appellate level whose cases involved
the relevance of the Bill of Rights to state law. (A)
Downloaded from jlr.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 16, 2016
16
Journal of Reading Behavior
Sandra Day O'Connor travelled from the blistering deserts of Arizona to the cool marble
columns and walnut-paneled offices of the Supreme Court Building in Washington. (C)
Sandra Day O'Connor was nominated for the Supreme Court because of her generally
conservative judicial belief in a strict construction of the Constitution. (A)
Sandra Day O'Connor was the first woman Supreme Court member and her ashblond tresses
flowing over her black robe were conspicuous in Court photographic portraits. (C)
Robespierre's role in the French Revolution was that of a political idol who favored "purifying" the social contract by replacing monarchy with a new republic. (A)
Robespierre was an egotistical, primly dressed and powdered, sexually repressed French
politician who lavished loving care on the pigeons and sparrows he raised. (C)
Robespierre believed that the French people, rid of the corrupting effects of class oppression,
would find Utopian happiness in a new social world order. (A)
Robespierre, condemned by the frenzied French revolutionaries he once instigated, shot
away his jawbone in a failed suicide attempt to cheat the dripping guillotine blade. (C)
Downloaded from jlr.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 16, 2016