文本連貫效果在大學生閱讀科學文章之角色

王孜甯

doi:10.6345/NTNU202201558

山西大学，您好！

感谢采购，人社期刊库｜人社论文库，期间：2025/01/01~2025/12/31

感谢试用，科学期刊库｜科学论文库，期间：2025/07/01~2025/09/30

浏览高级检索

关闭
检索检索高级检索出版物检索
浏览期刊主题浏览核心期刊浏览期刊拼音浏览

关闭

查询符号(半角)	查询符号意义说明
空格	表示为「AND」两个查询词之交集
双引号 ( " " )	片语以双引号标示开始及结束，而且只寻找出现顺序相同的字词，例： " image process "
?	表示一个字母切截，输入两个?表两个字母，依此类推，例：输入「Appl?」，查得结果应为appl e , appl y … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
*	表示不限字母切截，由0~n. 例：输入「appl*」，查得结果应为appl e , appl es , appl y , appl ied , appl ication … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
AND、OR、NOT	布尔逻辑组合关键字，用来扩大或缩小查询范围的技巧。 (1) AND ：缩小查询范围 (2) OR ：扩大查询范围(3) NOT：排除不相关的范围

DOI 是数位物件识别码（ D igital O bject I dentifier ）的简称，
为物件在网路上的唯一识别码，可用于永久连结并引用目标物件。

使用DOI作为永久连结

每个DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」便成为永久网址。
如以DOI号为 10.5297/ser.1201.002 的文献为例，此文献的永久连结便是： http://dx.doi.org/ 10.5297/ser.1201.002 。
日后不论出版单位如何更动此文献位置，永久连结所指向的位置皆会即时更新，不再错失重要的研究。

引用含有DOI的文献

有DOI的文献在引用时皆应同时引用DOI。若使用APA、Chicago以外未规范DOI的引用格式，可引用DOI永久连结。

DOI可强化引用精确性、增强学术圈连结，并给予使用者跨平台的良好使用经验，目前在全世界已有超过五千万个对象申请DOI。如想对DOI的使用与概念有进一步了解，请参考（）。

书目管理工具

导出
E-mail 给朋友
打印书目

相关连结

问题回报

全文下载

文本连贯效果在大学生阅读科学文章之角色

The Role of Cohesion Effect in Science Text Reading for College Students

王孜甯 , 博士　　导师：简郁芩　　

繁体中文 DOI： 10.6345/NTNU202201558

连贯效果；科学文章阅读；自我调整；眼球追踪；大学生； cohesion effect ； science text reading ； self-regulation ； eye-tracking ； college students

0 个人觉得这篇文章赞

摘要 │ 参考文献 (190) │ 国际计量

摘要〈TOP〉

大学是从课室学习迈向独立自主终身学习的重要过渡阶段，倘能在此时期找到有效解读科学文章讯息的方法，将有助於提升现代公民必备的科学素养。文本连贯性（text cohesion）是影响阅读理解的重要因素，本研究以文本连贯性对台湾大学生阅读科学说明文的理解为研究核心，而台湾目前并没有评量大学生说明文阅读理解能力的测验，因此本研究之主要目的有二：第一，因着研究需求，发展一套适用於测量大学生说明文阅读理解能力的测验；第二，探索文本特徵（即文本连贯性）、读者特徵（即阅读理解能力、先备知识）与任务经验（即阅读文章加上做测验为一次任务周期）在科学文章阅读理解的关系，透过眼动等线上（on-line）历程资料、测验等离线（offline）测量资料，以及结合线上与离线的提示回溯放声思考原案，探讨大学生阅读高低连贯性科学文章时的阅读理解表现和历程。研究参与者为120名20—30岁之大学生（含研究生），随机分派至四种实验组别，每位参与者皆会阅读两篇各约1,500字的地球科学文章，阅读顺序采平衡设计，操弄条件为文本连贯性（高连贯性 vs. 低连贯性）和任务经验（初次任务 vs. 再次任务）。参与者先进行特徵变项的测量，包括研究者自编《大专生说明文阅读理解测验》和《先备知识测验》，随後依照分派组别阅读科学文章，同时录制其眼动情况，阅读後实施阅读表现测验，包括提示回忆测验与理解表现测验。第二次任务的阅读和测验结束後再进行提示回溯放声思考（cued retrospective think-aloud），即播放参与者阅读时的电脑萤幕画面与眼动轨迹，请参与者解释自己是如何进行阅读的，做为阅读历程解释的辅助。在资料分析的部分，阅读表现和全文层次、主题层次眼动指标资料采线性混合模型（linear mixed-effects models, LMMs）进行分析。阅读表现结果发现，在控制文本内容後，文本连贯性对大学生科学文章理解表现的效果会受到任务经验调节，连贯效果（即高连贯文本比低连贯文本更有利）仅出现於再次任务者的理解表现，而初次任务者则否；另一方面，再次任务者阅读高连贯文本时比初次任务者有更好的理解表现；从全文层次的眼动资料的确可以发现，再次任务者在高连贯文本的总凝视时间、总凝视次数皆显着高於初次任务者，显示有过任务经验的读者会调整自己的阅读方式，投注更多心力在高连贯的新材料上，支持自我调整学习理论（self-regulated learning theory），但任务经验对於低连贯文本的理解表现和全文层次眼动指标并无影响；至於提示回忆表现则未出现文本连贯性与任务经验的交互作用。此外，不论在理解表现或提示回忆表现，连贯效果并未受到阅读能力或先备知识调节，因此能力强化效果假说（ability-as-enhancer hypothesis）或补偿假说（compensation hypothesis）并未获得支持证据；但阅读能力与先备知识皆产生主要效果，亦即高阅读能力者与高先备知识者皆有较佳的理解表现和提示回忆表现。眼动资料显示，阅读能力越高者解码科学文章讯息越容易（反映在较低的平均凝视时间），且阅读能力有可能与主题段落较快的理解整合有关（反映在其中一篇文章的主题层次再次注视时间越少）；而先备知识越高，主题层次每字凝视时间与首次每字注视时间越少，表示处理科学文章讯息需花费的认知资源越少，尤其是初始处理。概念层次眼动指标资料采滞後序列分析（lag sequential analyses, LSA），结果显示再次任务者阅读高连贯文本会进行较为密集的概念参照，尤其是在因果集合、比较对照等结构性强的子主题内会有较多的概念间视觉转移；初次任务者在阅读低连贯文本时经常做的是跨主题的参照，再次任务者在阅读低连贯文本反而增加的是局部参照，或许这也部分反映了任务经验增加没有带来低连贯文本阅读表现进步的原因。阅读阶段层次眼动指标资料使用三次成长模型（cubic growth curve analysis, GCA）进行分析，将凝视时间切割为总阅读时间的每10%为一个波段，针对材料中各个别页面形成纵贯资料，结果显示科学文章第一页在阅读初期有较多凝视时间，但趋势持续下降，随後凝视又会在第八波段左右再度增加，显示阅读中後期读者会回到首页重读，至於其他页面的凝视时间通常呈现先升後降的趋势，但依照页面顺序，由升转降的反曲点位置会有波段递移的情况，到了阅读中後期又会缓升，但并非每一页都出现这种斜率转正的曲线，显示到了阅读中後期通常为选择性的认知处理，带有特定的阅读目的。整体而言，本研究为Kintsch建构—整合模式中的表徵层次提供了实徵证据，以历程资料和测量资料共同描绘大学生科学文章阅读理解的样貌，呈现文本特徵与读者特徵交互影响的情况，强调理解模型需要考虑文本特徵（即文本连贯性）的潜在复杂性，同时涵盖一些支持阅读理解的其他历程（例如：自我调整），以及通常需要纳入的个别差异因子（即阅读理解能力和先备知识）。最後提出理论与实务上的启示、限制，以及未来可能的研究方向。

并列摘要〈TOP〉

College marks an important transition from in-class learning to lifelong learning. Therefore, if students can develop an effective approach to acquire information from science text during this period, their scientific literacy, considered as a necessary ability for modern citizens, can be improved as a result. However, even though expository texts are common in scientific reading, no test is currently available for evaluating the expository reading comprehension skills of college students in Taiwan. Hence, the first aim of this study was to develop an acceptable reading comprehension ability test for college students. Besides, since text cohesion is regarded as an important factor of reading comprehension, the second aim focused on the role of cohesion effect in expository scientific reading for Taiwanese college students. That is, the relationship between text features (i.e., text cohesion), reader features (i.e., reading comprehension skills, prior knowledge) and task experience (i.e., text reading and test practicing as a task cycle) in science text reading comprehension was explored through online measures (i.e., eye movements), offline measurement (i.e., tests), and combined online and offline measures (i.e., cued retrospectively think-aloud, CRTA). One hundred and twenty college and graduate students aged 20-30 participated in the experiment, randomly assigned to four experimental groups. Each participant read two earth science articles containing about 1,500 words each, with a balanced reading order. Text cohesion (high cohesion vs. low cohesion) and task experience (cycle 1 vs. cycle 2) were manipulated. A task cycle involves the following phases. The demographic and characteristic variables of participants were first measured, including the self-derived “Reading Comprehension Test of Expository Text for College Students” and “Prior Knowledge Test,” and then they would read the assigned science text, with their eye movements recorded in the meantime. After reading, performance tests (including cued recalls and comprehension performance tests) were administrated. Once the two task cycles were done, the cued retrospective think-aloud would be performed, in which participants verbalized their thoughts while watching their eye-movement recordings.
As for data analysis, three analysis methods were carried out. Firstly, the reading performance, full-text-level and topic-level eye-tracking indicators were analyzed with linear mixed-effect models (LMMs). The results of reading performance showed that after controlling for text content, the effect of text cohesion on the comprehension performance was moderated by task experience, and the cohesion effect (that is, high-cohesion texts were more favorable than low-cohesion texts) only appeared in Cycle 2. In the high-cohesion condition, the participants had better comprehension performance in Cycle 2 than those in Cycle 1. Besides, the results of the full-text-level eye-tracking indicators showed that the readers reading high-cohesion texts had significantly higher total fixation duration and total fixation count in Cycle 2 than those in Cycle 1, indicating that readers who had task experience would regulate their reading strategies and invest more effort in their next reading, which supports the self-regulated learning (SRL) theory. However, task experience had no effect on comprehension performance and full-text-level eye-tracking indicators in the low-cohesion condition. As for cued recall, there was no interaction between text cohesion and task experience. In addition, cohesion effects were not moderated by reading comprehension skills or prior knowledge, neither on comprehension performance nor on cued recall. Therefore, no supporting evidence was found for the ability-as-enhancer hypothesis or the compensation hypothesis. However, both reading skills and prior knowledge had main effects, that is, those with high reading skills and high prior knowledge had better comprehension and cued recall performance. Eye-tracking data showed that readers with high reading skills were better at decoding science text (reflected on shorter mean fixation duration), and that reading skills were likely to be associated with more efficient integration of information in each subtopic, indicated by the shorter topic-level second-pass fixation duration per character found in one of the reading articles. Also, the higher the prior knowledge, the shorter the total fixation duration per character and the first-pass fixation duration per character at the topic level, indicating that prior knowledge helped the cognitive processing of science text, especially in initial processing. In the second analysis method, the concept-level eye-tracking indicators were analyzed by lag sequential analyses (LSA). The results showed that readers who read high-cohesion texts in Cycle 2 would make more visual transitions between concepts, especially in highly structural subtopics made up of more causation and comparison. By contrast, readers who read low-cohesion texts in Cycle 1 often made cross-topic references, while the usage of local references in Cycle 2 increased instead, which might explain why increased task experience did not lead to improved reading performance in the low-cohesion condition. As for the last analysis method, the phase-level eye-tracking indicators was analyzed using cubic growth curve analysis (GCA), and the fixation duration was divided into ten waves (every 10% of the total reading time), forming longitudinal data for each individual page of the science text. The results showed that the fixation duration of the first page of science text was high in the early phase of reading but declined afterwards, and then increased again around in the eighth wave, indicating that readers were inclined to reread the first page in mid- and late-stage of reading. As for the fixation duration of other pages, the duration tended to increase then decline in each of the following pages, and the position of the first inflection point from rising to falling had a wave transition along with the page order. However, a second inflection point from falling to mildly rising was only found in some pages, indicating that readers would perform selective cognitive processing in the mid- and late-stages of reading in response to the specific reading purpose.
Overall, this study provided empirical evidence for the representational level and the role of prior knowledge in Kintsch’s construction–integration model (CI model), and used process data and measurement data to jointly describe college students’ reading comprehension of science text. In addition, this study further highlighted the interaction between text characteristics and reader characteristics, emphasizing that comprehension models need to take the underlying complexity of text features (i.e., text cohesion) into account. Furthermore, several aspects were also considered in this research, including the processes that support reading comprehension (e.g., self-regulation), and individual differences, which also often need to be incorporated (i.e., reading comprehension skills and prior knowledge). Finally, the theoretical and practical implications, limitations, and possible future directions were addressed in the last section.

参考文献 ( 190 ) 〈TOP〉

简郁芩、吴昭容（2012）：〈以眼动型态和阅读测验表现探讨箭头在科学图文阅读中的图示效果〉。《中华心理学刊》，54，385–402。[Jian, Y.-C., & Wu, C.-J. (2012). The effect of arrows in an illustration when reading scientific text: Evidence from eye movements and reading tests. Chinese Journal of Psychology, 54, 385–402.] https://doi.org/10.6129/cjp.2012.5403.07
连结：
王木荣、董宜俐（2006）：《国民小学阅读理解测验》。心理出版社。[Wang, M.-R., & Dong, Y.-L. (2006). Reading Comprehension Test for Elementary School Students. Psychological Publishing.]
王孜甯、简郁芩（2022）：〈科学图文阅读眼动研究之系统回顾〉。《教育心理学报》，53，773–800。[Wang, T.-N., & Jian, Y.-C. (2022). A systematic review of eye-tracking studies on text-diagram science reading. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 53, 773–799.] https://doi.org/10.6251/BEP.202206_53(4).0001
李奕璇、周业太、宋曜廷（2021）：〈中文阅读能力适性诊断评量编制研究〉。《教育心理学报》，53，285–305。[Lee, Y.-H., Chou, Y.-T., & Sung, Y.-T. (2021). Development and validation of a diagnostic assessment of Chinese competence system. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 53, 285–305.] https://doi.org/10.6251/bep.202112_53(2).0002
宋曜廷、陈茹玲、李宜宪、查日龢、曾厚强、林维骏、张道行、张国恩（2013）：〈中文文本可读性探讨：指标选取、模型建立与效度验证〉。《中华心理学刊》，55，75–106。[Sung, Y.-T., Chen, R.-L., Lee, Y.-S., Cha, J.-H., Tseng, H.-C., W.-C., Chang, T.-H., & Chang, K.-E. (2013). Investigating Chinese text readability: Linguistic features, modeling, and validation. Chinese Journal of Psychology, 55, 75–106.] https://doi.org/10.6129/CJP.20120621

国际计量

〈TOP〉

E-mail ：

文章公开取用时，将寄通知信至您填写的信箱地址

E-mail ：

使用DOI作为永久连结

引用含有DOI的文献

DOI可强化引用精确性、增强学术圈连结，并给予使用者跨平台的良好使用经验，目前在全世界已有超过五千万个对象申请DOI。 如想对DOI的使用与概念有进一步了解，请参考 （ ） 。

DOI可强化引用精确性、增强学术圈连结，并给予使用者跨平台的良好使用经验，目前在全世界已有超过五千万个对象申请DOI。如想对DOI的使用与概念有进一步了解，请参考（）。