Thinking aloud: effects on text comprehension by children with specific language impairment and their peers
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Many lines of evidence now suggest that inferencing plays a substantial role in text comprehension. However, inferencing appears to be difficult for children with language impairments, many of whom are also struggling readers. AIMS: To assess the effects of a 'think-aloud' procedure on inference generation and narrative text comprehension by children with expressive-receptive specific language impairment (SLI) and age-matched peers with typical language development (TLD). METHODS & PROCEDURES: An SLI group (n = 12; mean age = 10;5) and an age-matched TLD group (n = 12) participated in the study. Narrative passages were read silently by participants and simultaneously read aloud by the examiner in two conditions: (1) uninterrupted reading and (2) a think-aloud, in which children verbalized their understanding as the text was read. Following the passages in both conditions, children responded to comprehension questions requiring either literal or inferential information (specifically, 'informational' and 'causal' inferences). The children's comprehension scores were analysed by group, condition and question type. The statements children generated during the think-aloud were also compared by group and examined in relation to children's comprehension scores. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: The SLI group scored lower than the TLD group on all questions (literal, informational and causal), in both conditions. For both groups, however, comprehension scores on all three types of questions increased when the think-aloud procedure was implemented. During the think-aloud, the SLI group generated a comparable number of literal statements compared with the TLD group, but fewer informational and causal statements. The number of causal statements children made correlated with their scores on the inferential comprehension questions. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Children with expressive-receptive SLI showed poorer comprehension of narrative texts than children with TLD, as expected. However, both groups' comprehension improved when participating in the think-aloud condition. While further investigation is warranted, the think-aloud procedure shows promise as a strategy to enhance narrative text comprehension in school-age children with, and without, language impairments.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».