兒童局部與整體連貫性推論能力發展研究

A developmental study of children's local and global coherence inference abilities

10.6251/BEP.202003_51(3).0002

張菀芯(Wan-Shin Chang)；曾玉村(Yuh-Tsuen Tzeng)

局部連貫性 ； 推論 ； 整體連貫性 ； Global coherence ； Inference ； Local coherence

教育心理學報

51卷3期（2020 / 03 / 01）

369 - 386

繁體中文

理解並非一個單一的歷程，相反的，理解需要許多種推論能力以建構情境表徵。推論的發展差異在閱讀研究中是重要議題，然而現階段對於局部與整體連貫性推論的發展順序尚待釐清。局部連貫性推論需要建立字詞與句之間的連結（例如代名詞），整體連貫性推論需要讀者超過文本並結合自身知識已填補文章中缺失的細節。本研究針對局部與整體連貫性推論進行年級間的差異分析，也進一步以群聚分析探討跨年級資料合併後的潛在型態。研究採用六篇各約200字的短篇故事，每篇有1題字面題，2題局部連貫性推論題及1題整體連貫性推論問題，皆為選擇題形式。結果發現，四、五年級學童在兩種推論類型表現都優於三年級學童，且五年級學童在局部連貫性推論的表現優於三、四年級學童；然而此差距並不必然是年紀的影響，跨年級的學童也可能存在有共同的反應型態：即使年齡、能力相當的學童中，仍在局部與整體連貫性的推論有不同的表現。群聚分析得出四種不同的反應型態，顯示理解所需的推論技能並非都同步發展。對能夠做整體連貫性推論的學童來說，並非皆具有高局部連貫性推論能力。本研究結果顯示出學童在推論發展順序上存在個別差異，應針對學童所欠缺的推論能力進行教學，給予更合適的推論課程。

Comprehension is not a unitary process. Instead, in addition to many other cognitive skills, several types of inference abilities are required to construct a situation model from the text. Despite knowing developmental differences in students' inference abilities for reading comprehension, definite conclusions on the relative developmental sequence of local and global coherence inference cannot be reached. For reading comprehension, local coherence inferences are needed to establish links between words and sentences (e.g., anaphor). Global coherence inferences are required for readers to go beyond the text and integrate it with their general knowledge to fill the missing details and understand the text as a whole. In this study, we examined the development of both local and global inferences between and across grade levels. In this study, six short narrative passages were selected, each constituting approximately 200 Chinese characters. We devised one literal, two local, and one global coherence inference questions for each text in the multiple-choice format. The results clearly showed that both fourth and fifth grade students performed better than third grade students for both types of inferences. Additionally, fifth grade students had higher scores than third and fourth grade students for local and global coherence inferences. Cluster analysis of the inferences across grades indicated that students' performance was not solely determined by their grade. Individual differences within grades and similar patterns across grades were observed. Cluster analysis results showed the existence of four groups. The results confirmed that comprehension is a complex process and that not all subskills can be developed simultaneously. Not all students with high global inference ability are good at making local coherence inferences. Individual differences in the patterns of inference abilities are revealing and call for more research attention. The patterns revealed in this study can also serve as good foundations for reading instructions that emphasize individual differences.

1. Oakhill, J.,Cain, K.(2018).Children’s problems with inference making: causes and consequences.Bulletin of Educational Psychology,49(4),683-699.
   連結：
2. Tzeng, Y.(2007).Memory of narrative texts: How parts of Landscape model work.Chinese Journal of Psychology,49(3),1-25.
   連結：
3. 曾玉村,黃秋華,張菀芯(2018)。兒童閱讀歷程的代名詞與因果推論發展研究：橫切與個別差異的分析。教育心裡學報，49(4)，513-535。
   連結：
4. 黃秋華, C.-H.,陸偉明, W.-M.,曾玉村, Y.-T.(2014)。中文兒童代名詞推論能力的發展研究：提及順位與性別語義特徵的影響。教育心理學報，45(4)，555-576。
   連結：
5. 蘇宜芬, Y. F.,洪儷瑜, L. Y.,陳柏熹, P. H.,陳心怡, H. Y.(2018)。閱讀理解成長測驗之編製研究。教育心理學報，49(4)，558-580。
   連結：
6. Ackerman, B. P.(1986).Referential and causal coherence in the story comprehension of children and adults.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,41,336-366.
7. Albrecht, J. E.,O’Brien, E. J.(1993).Updating a mental model: Maintaining both local and global coherence.Journal of Experimental Psychology,19,1061-1070.
8. Barnes, M. A.,Dennis, M.,Haefele-Kalvaitis, J.(1996).The effects of knowledge availability and knowledge accessibility on coherence and elaborative inferencing in children from six to fifteen years of age.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,61,216-241.
9. Best, R. M.,Floyd, R. G.,McNamara, D.(2008).Differential competencies contributing to children's comprehension of narrative and expository texts.Reading Psychology,29(2),137-164.
10. Cain, K.,Oakhill, J.(1996).The nature of the relationship between comprehension skill and the ability to tell a story.British Journal of Developmental Psychology,14,187-201.
11. Cain, K.,Oakhill, J.(1999).Inference making ability and its relation to comprehension failure.Reading and Writing,11(5-6),489-503.
12. Cain, K.,Oakhill, J.(1998).Comprehension skill and inference-making ability: Issues of causality.Reading and spelling: Development and disorders,Mahwah, NJ, US:
13. Cain, K.,Oakhill, J. V.,Barnes, M. A.,Bryant, P. E.(2001).Comprehension Skill, Inference-Making Ability, and Their Relation to Knowledge.Memory & Cognition,29,850-859.
14. Cain, K.,Oakhill, J.,Bryant, P.(2004).Children’s Reading Comprehension Ability: Concurrent Prediction by Working Memory, Verbal Ability, and Component Skills.Journal of Educational Psychology,96,31-42.
15. Calvo, M. G.(2004).Relative contribution of vocabulary knowledge and working memory span to elaborative inferences in reading.Learning and Individual Differences,15,53-65.
16. Casteel, M. A.(1993).Effects of inference necessity and reading goal on children’s inferential generation.Developmental Psychology,29,346-357.
17. Cromley, J.,Azevedo, R.(2007).Testing and refining the direct and inferential mediation model of reading comprehension.Journal of Educational Psychology,99,311-325.
18. Currie, N. K.,Cain, K.(2015).Children’s inference generation: The role of vocabulary and working memory.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,137,57-75.
19. Freed, J.,Cain, K.(2017).Assessing school-aged children’s inference-making: the effect of story test format in listening comprehension.International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders,52(1),95-105.
20. Gordon, P. C.,Hendrick, R.,Ledoux, K.,Yang, C. L.(1999).Processing of reference and the structure of language: An analysis of complex noun phrases.Language and Cognitive Processes,14,353-379.
21. Graesser, A. C.,Singer, M.,Trabasso, T.(1994).Constructing Inferences during Narrative Text Comprehension.Psychological Review,101,371-395.
22. Järvikivi, J.,van Gompel, P. G.,Hyönä, J.,Bertram, R.(2005).Ambiguous pronoun resolution: Contrasting the first-mention and subject-preference accounts.Psychological Science,16(4),260-264.
23. Jian, Y. C.(2018).Reading instructions influence cognitive processes of illustrated text reading not subject perception: An eye-tracking study.Frontiers in Psychology,29(9),1-12.
24. Kendeou, P.,Van Den Broek, P.(2007).The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts.Memory and Cognition,35(7),1567-1577.
25. Kintsch, W.,Van Dijk, T. A.(1978).Toward a model of text comprehension and production.Psychological Review,85(5),363-394.
26. Linderholm, T.(2002).Predictive inference generation as a function of working memory capacity and causal text constraints.Discourse Processes,34(3),259-280.
27. Lynch, J. S.,van den Broek, P.,Kremer, K. E.,Kendeou, P.,White, M. J.,Lorch, E. P.(2008).The development of narrative comprehension and its relation to other early reading skills.Reading Psychology,29(4),327-365.
28. McGee, A.,Johnson, H.(2003).The effect of inference training on skilled and less skilled comprehenders.Educational Psychology,23(1),49-59.
29. Oakhill, J.(1984).Inferential and memory skills in children’s comprehension of stories.British Journal of Educational Psychology,54,31-39.
30. Oakhill, J.(1983).Instantiation in skilled and less skilled comprehenders.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Series a Human Experimental Psychology,35(3),441-450.
31. Oakhill, J. V.,Yuill, N. M.(1986).Pronoun resolution in skilled and less-skilled comprehenders: Effects of memory load and inferential complexity.Language and Speech,29,25-37.
32. Ouellette, G. P.(2006).What's meaning got to do with it: The role of vocabulary in word reading and reading comprehension.Journal of Educational Psychology,98(3),554-566.
33. Sanders, T. J. M.,Noordman, L. G. M.(2000).The role of coherence relations and their linguistic markers in text processing.Discourse Processes,29,37-60.
34. Schmidt, C. R.,Paris, S. G.(1983).Children’s use of successive clues to generate and monitor inferences.Child Development,54(3),742-759.
35. Singer, M.,Andruslak, P.,Reisdorf, P.,Black, N. L.(1992).Individual differences in bridging inference processes.Memory & Cognition,20(5),539-548.
36. Tannenbaum, K.R.,Torgesen, J.K.,Wagner, R.K.(2006).Relationships between word knowledge and reading comprehension in third-grade children.Scientific Studies of Reading,10,381-398.
37. Trabasso, T.,Suh, S.(1993).Understanding text: Achieving explanatory coherence through on-line inferences and mental operations in working memory.Discourse Processes,16(1-2),3-34.
38. Van Oijk, T. A.,Kintsch, W.(1983).Strangies of Discourse Comprehension.New York, NY:Academic press.
39. Yuill, N.,Oakhill, J.(1991).Cambridge monographs and texts in applied psycholinguistics. Children’s problems in text comprehension: An experimental investigation.Cambridge University Press.
40. 林寶貴, B.-G.,錡寶香, P.-H.(2000)。中文閱讀理解測驗之編製。特殊教育學刊，19，79-104。
41. 柯華葳, H.-W.(1999)。閱讀理解困難篩選測驗。中國測驗學會測驗年刊，46(2)，1-11。
42. 陳明蕾, M.(2003)。Chiayi, Taiwan，國立中正大學成人及繼續教育研究所=National Chung Cheng University。