title: Readers' use of source information in text comprehension.
abstract: In two experiments, we examined the role of discrepancy on readers' text processing of and memory for the sources of brief news reports. Each story included two assertions that were attributed to different sources. We manipulated whether the second assertion was either discrepant or consistent with the first assertion. On the basis of the discrepancy-induced source comprehension (D-ISC) assumption, we predicted that discrepant stories would promote deeper processing and better memory for the sources conveying the messages, as compared to consistent stories. As predicted, readers mentioned more sources in summaries of discrepant stories, recalled more sources, made more fixations, and displayed longer gaze times in source areas when reading discrepant than when reading consistent stories. In Experiment 2, we found enhanced memory for source-content links for discrepant stories even when intersentential connectors were absent, and regardless of the reading goals. Discussion was focused on discrepancies as one mechanism by which readers are prompted to encode source-content links more deeply, as a method of integrating disparate pieces of information into a coherent mental representation of a text.
authors.affiliation: CNRS and University of Poitiers, Poitiers, France. jason.braasch@uio.no
authors.forename: Jason L G
authors.initials: JL
authors.lastname: Braasch
authors.forename: Jean-François
authors.initials: JF
authors.lastname: Rouet
authors.forename: Nicolas
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Vibert
authors.forename: M Anne
authors.initials: MA
authors.lastname: Britt
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D001245:Association Learning; D001288:Attention; D032882:Comprehension; D003220:Conflict, Psychological; D005260:Female; D005403:Fixation, Ocular; D005793:Generalization, Psychological; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011939:Mental Recall; D011930:Reaction Time; D011932:Reading; D055815:Young Adult
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2004 Jan;30(1):283-8; discussion 289-91
references.pmid: 14736313
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1988 Apr;95(2):163-82
references.pmid: 3375398
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1998 Nov;24(6):1483-94
references.pmid: 9835062
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 2000 Sep;28(6):1011-21
references.pmid: 11105527
references.citation: Cogn Emot. 1992;6(2):89-111
references.pmid: 25309018
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 2003 Jan;31(1):77-86
references.pmid: 12699145
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1992 Jul;99(3):440-66
references.pmid: 1502273
references.citation: Psychol Bull. 1998 Nov;124(3):372-422
references.pmid: 9849112
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1992 Jul;18(4):777-84
references.pmid: 1385615
references.citation: Psychol Bull. 1993 Jul;114(1):3-28
references.pmid: 8346328
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 2007 Dec;35(8):2019-32
references.pmid: 18265617
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1998 Sep;24(5):1200-10
references.pmid: 9747530
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2001 Jan;27(1):67-80
references.pmid: 11204108