Abstract
An experiment is reported in which young, middle-aged, and older adults read and recalled ambiguous texts either with or without the topic title that supplied contextual knowledge. Within each of the age groups, the participants were divided into those with high or low working memory (WM) spans, with available WM capacity further manipulated by the presence or absence of an auditory target detection task concurrent with the reading task. Differences in reading efficiency (reading time per proposition recalled) between low WM span and high WM span groups were greater among readers who had access to contextual knowledge relative to those who did not, suggesting that contextual knowledge reduces demands on WM capacity. This position was further supported by the finding that increased age and attentional demands, two factors associated with reduced WM capacity, exaggerated the benefits of contextual knowledge on reading efficiency. The relative strengths of additional potential predictors of reading efficiency (e.g., interest, effort, and memory beliefs), along with knowledge, WM span, and age, are reported. Findings showed that contextual knowledge was the strongest predictor of reading efficiency even after controlling for the effects of all of the other predictors.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Aaronson, D., &Scarborough, H. S. (1976). Performance theories for sentence coding: Some quantitative evidence.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,2, 56–70.
Adams, B. C., Bell, L. C., &Perfetti, C. A. (1995). A trading relationship between reading skill and domain knowledge in children’s text comprehension.Discourse Processes,20, 302–323.
Arbuckle, T. Y., Vanderleck, V. F., Harsany, M., &Lapidus, S. (1990). Adult age differences in memory in relation to availability and accessibility of knowledge-based schemas.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,16, 305–315.
Baddeley, A. D., &Hitch, G. J. (1974). Working memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 47–90). New York: Academic Press.
Bransford, J., &Johnson, M. (1972). Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of comprehension and recall.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,11, 717–726.
Britton, B. K., Holdredge, T. S., Curry, C., &Westbrook, R. (1979). Use of cognitive capacity in reading identical texts with different amounts of discourse level meaning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,5, 262–270.
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., &Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition.Journal of Personality Assessment,48, 306–307.
Carpenter, P., Miyake, A., &Just, M. (1994). Working memory constraints in comprehension. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.),Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 1075–1115). New York: Academic Press.
Carver, R. P. (1990).Reading rate: A review of research and theory. San Diego: Academic Press.
Chi, M., Glaser, R., &Farr, M. J. (1988).The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chiesi, H., Spilich, G., &Voss, J. (1979). Acquisition of domain-related information in relation to high and low domain knowledge.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,18, 257–273.
Clancy, S., &Hoyer, W. (1994). Age and skill in visual search.Developmental Psychology,30, 545–552.
Daneman, M., &Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,19, 450–466.
Daneman, M., &Merikle, P. M. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,3, 422–433.
Dooling, D. J., &Lachman, R. (1971). Effects of comprehension on retention of prose.Journal of Experimental Psychology,88, 216–222.
Dunlosky, J., &Hertzog, C. (1998). Training programs to improve learning in later adulthood: Helping older adults educate themselves. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.),Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 249–276). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ekstrom, R. B., French, J. W., &Harman, H. H. (1976).Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Empirisoft (2004).DirectRT [Computer software]. New York: Author.
Engle, R. W. (2001). What is working memory capacity? In H. L. Roediger III, J. S. Nairne, I. Neath, & A. M. Surprenant (Eds.),The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G. Crowder (pp. 297–314). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Ericsson, K. A., &Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working memory.Psychological Review,102, 211–245.
Gardner, E. T., &Schumacher, G. M. (1977). Effects of contextual organization on prose retention.Journal of Educational Psychology,69, 146–151.
Guthrie, J. T., &Wigfield, A. (1999). How motivation fits into a science of reading.Scientific Studies of Reading,3, 199–205.
Hambrick, D. Z., &Engle, R. W. (2002). Effects of domain knowledge, working memory capacity, and age on cognitive performatnce: An investigation of the knowledge-is-power hypothesis.Cognitive Psychology,44, 339–387.
Hartley, J. T., Stojack, C. C., Mushaney, T. J., Annon, T. A. K., &Lee, D. W. (1994). Reading speed and prose memory in older and younger adults.Psychology & Aging,9, 216–223.
Hultsch, D. F., &Dixon, R. A. (1983). The role of pre-experimental knowledge in text processing in adulthood.Experimental Aging Research,9, 17–22.
Inhoff, A. W., &Fleming, K. (1989). Probe-detection times during the reading of easy and difficult text.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 339–351.
Johnson-Laird, P. (1983).Mental models. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Just, M. A., &Carpenter, P. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory.Psychological Review,99, 122–149.
Kaakinen, J. K., Hyönä, J., &Keenan, J. M. (2003). How prior knowledge, WMC, and relevance of information affect eye fixations in expository text.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,29, 447–457.
Kintsch, W. (1994). Text comprehension, memory, and learning.American Psychologist,49, 294–303.
Lachman, M. E., Bandura, M., Weaver, S. L., &Elliott, E. (1995). Assessing memory control beliefs: The Memory Controllability Inventory.Aging & Cognition,2, 67–84.
Lin, L., Zabrucky, K., &Moore, D. (1997). The relations among interest, self-assessed comprehension, and comprehension performance in young adults.Reading Research & Instruction,36, 127–139.
Mazzoni, G., &Cornoldi, C. (1993). Strategies in study time allocation: Why is study time sometimes not effective?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,122, 47–60.
McNamara, D. S., &Scott, J. L. (2001). Working memory capacity and strategy use.Memory & Cognition,29, 10–17.
Means, M. I., &Voss, J. (1985). Star Wars: A developmental study of expert and novice knowledge structures.Journal of Memory & Language,24, 746–757.
Meyer, B. J. F., Talbot, A. P., &Florencio, D. (1999). Reading rate and prose retrieval.Scientific Studies of Reading,3, 303–329.
Miller, L. M. S. (2001). Effects of real-world knowledge on text processing among older adults.Aging, Neuropsychology, & Cognition,8, 137–148.
Miller, L. M. S. (2003). The effects of age and domain knowledge on text processing.Journals of Gerontology,58B, P217-P223.
Miller, L. M. S., &Gagne, D. D. (2005). The effects of age and control beliefs on resource allocation during reading.Aging, Neuropsychology, & Cognition,12, 129–148.
Miller, L. M. S., &Stine-Morrow, E. A. L. (1998). Aging and the effects of knowledge on on-line reading strategies.Journals of Gerontology,53B, P223-P233.
Miller, L. M. S., Stine-Morrow, E. A. L., Kirkorian, H., &Conroy, M. (2004). Adult age differences in knowledge-driven reading.Journal of Educational Psychology,96, 811–821.
Moravcsik, J., &Kintsch, W. (1993). Writing quality, reading skills, and domain knowledge as factors in text comprehension.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,47, 360–374.
Morrow, D. G., Leirer, V. O., &Altieri, P. A. (1992). Aging, expertise, and narrative processing.Psychology & Aging,7, 376–388.
Morrow, D. [G.], Leirer, V. [O.], Altieri, P. [A.], &Fitzsimmons, C. (1994). When expertise reduces age differences in performance.Psychology & Aging,9, 134–148.
Rawson, K. A., &Kintsch, W. (2002). How does background information improve memory for text content?Memory & Cognition,30, 768–778.
Salthouse, T. A. (1991).Theoretical perspectives on cognitive aging. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schiefele, U., &Krapp, A. (1996). Topic interest and free recall of expository text.Learning & Individual Differences,8, 141–161.
Sharkey, N., &Sharkey, A. (1987). What is the point of facilitation? The loci of knowledge-based facilitation in sentence processing.Journal of Memory & Language,26, 255–276.
Smith, E. E., &Swinney, D. A. (1992). The role of schemas in reading text: A real-time examination.Discourse Processes,15, 303–316.
Sohn, Y. W., &Doane, S. M. (2003). Roles of working memory capacity and long-term working memory skill in complex task performance.Memory & Cognition,31, 458–466.
Spilich, G., Vesonder, G., Chiesi, H., &Voss, J. (1979). Text processing of domain-related information for individuals with high and low domain knowledge.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,18, 275–290.
Stine, E. A. L., &Hindman, J. (1994). Age differences in reading time allocation for propositionally dense sentences.Aging, Neuropsychology, & Cognition,1, 2–16.
Stine, E. A. L., Lachman, M., &Wingfield, A. (1993). The roles of perceived and actual control in memory for spoken language.Educational Gerontology,19, 331–349.
Summers, W. V., Horton, D. L., &Diehl, V. A. (1985). Contextual knowledge during encoding influences sentence recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,11, 771–779.
Taylor, B. M. (1979). Good and poor readers’ recall of familiar and unfamiliar text.Journal of Reading Behavior,11, 375–380.
Turner, A., & Greene, F. (1978). Construction and use of a propositional text base.JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology,8(3, MS. no. 1713).
van Dijk, T. A., &Kintsch, W. (1983).Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
Vicente, K. J., &Wang, J. H. (1998). An ecological theory of expertise effects in memory recall.Psychological Review,105, 33–57.
Voss, J., Vesonder, G., &Spilich, G. (1980). Text generation and recall by high-knowledge and low-knowledge individuals.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,19, 651–667.
Walker, N., Jones, J. P., &Mar, H. H. (1983). Encoding processes and the recall of text.Memory & Cognition,11, 275–282.
West, R. L., Stanovich, K. E., &Cunningham, A. E. (1995). Compensatory processes in reading. In R. A. Dixon & L. Bäckman (Eds.),Compensating for psychological deficits and declines: Managing losses and promoting gains (pp. 275–295). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wiley, J., &Rayner, K. (2000). Effects of titles on the processing of text and lexically ambiguous words: Evidence from eye movements.Memory & Cognition,28, 1011–1021.
Wingfield, A., Stine, E. A. L., Lahar, C. J., &Aberdeen, J. S. (1988). Does the capacity of working memory change with age?Experimental Aging Research,14, 103–107.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by NIH Grant AG19196 to L.M.S.M. and by NIH Grant AG04517 to A.W.
Note—This article was accepted by the previous editorial team, when Colin M. MacLeod was Editor.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Miller, L.M.S., Cohen, J.A. & Wingfield, A. Contextual knowledge reduces demands on working memory during reading. Memory & Cognition 34, 1355–1367 (2006). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193277
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193277