Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Typing versus thinking aloud when reading: implications for computer-based assessment and training tools.

Brenton Muñoz1, Joseph P Magliano, Robin Sheridan

  • 1Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, Illinois, USA.

Behavior Research Methods
|September 8, 2006
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

The role of event understanding in guiding attentional selection in real-world scenes: The Scene Perception & Event Comprehension Theory (SPECT).

Attention, perception & psychophysics·2026
Same author

Bridging a Gap in Coherence: The Coordination of Comprehension Processes When Viewing Visual Narratives.

Vision (Basel, Switzerland)·2024
Same author

Relationships between task awareness, comprehension strategies, and literacy outcomes.

Frontiers in psychology·2023
Same author

Automated Strategy Feedback Can Improve the Readability of Physicians' Electronic Communications to Simulated Patients.

International journal of human-computer studies·2023
Same author

Leveraging a multidimensional linguistic analysis of constructed responses produced by college readers.

Frontiers in psychology·2022
Same author

Before and during COVID-19: A Cohesion Network Analysis of students' online participation in moodle courses.

Computers in human behavior·2022

Producing think-aloud protocols by speaking versus typing affects reading strategies differently across text types and reader skill levels. Typing may hinder some strategies, impacting reading assessment.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Educational Psychology
  • Human-Computer Interaction

Background:

  • Think-aloud protocols are valuable for understanding reading processes.
  • The modality of protocol production (speaking vs. typing) may influence the strategies readers employ.
  • Understanding these differences is crucial for accurate reading assessment and intervention.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate how speaking versus typing think-aloud protocols impacts reading strategies.
  • To examine these effects across different text types (narrative and science) and varying reading skill levels.

Main Methods:

  • Two studies were conducted involving readers producing think-aloud protocols by speaking or typing.
  • Participants read narrative and science texts and completed comprehension tests.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Human judges analyzed protocols for paraphrasing, bridging inferences, and elaborating.
  • Reading comprehension skill was assessed using the Nelson-Denny test.

    • Main Results:

    • For narrative texts, speaking led to more frequent paraphrasing and bridging inferences than typing.
    • For science texts, less-skilled readers made more bridging inferences when typing than speaking.
    • Skilled readers produced more paraphrases than bridges when typing, but not when speaking.

    Conclusions:

    • The modality of think-aloud protocol production significantly influences observed reading strategies.
    • Findings suggest modality effects vary by text type and reader expertise.
    • Results have implications for the design and interpretation of computer-based reading assessment and intervention tools.