title: Updating during reading comprehension: why causality matters.
abstract: The present set of 7 experiments systematically examined the effectiveness of adding causal explanations to simple refutations in reducing or eliminating the impact of outdated information on subsequent comprehension. The addition of a single causal-explanation sentence to a refutation was sufficient to eliminate any measurable disruption in comprehension caused by the outdated information (Experiment 1) but was not sufficient to eliminate its reactivation (Experiment 2). However, a 3 sentence causal-explanation addition to a refutation eliminated both any measurable disruption in comprehension (Experiment 3) and the reactivation of the outdated information (Experiment 4). A direct comparison between the 1 and 3 causal-explanation conditions provided converging evidence for these findings (Experiment 5). Furthermore, a comparison of the 3 sentence causal-explanation condition with a 3 sentence qualified-elaboration condition demonstrated that even though both conditions were sufficient to eliminate any measurable disruption in comprehension (Experiment 6), only the causal-explanation condition was sufficient to eliminate the reactivation of the outdated information (Experiment 7). These results establish a boundary condition under which outdated information will influence comprehension; they also have broader implications for both the updating process and knowledge revision in general.
authors: School of Health Sciences, Neapolis University Pafos, Pafos 8042, Cyprus. p.kendeou@nup.ac.cy
authors: Panayiota
authors: P
authors: Kendeou
authors: Emily R
authors: ER
authors: Smith
authors: Edward J
authors: EJ
authors: O'Brien
mesh_terms: D015984:Causality; D032882:Comprehension / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011932:Reading; D012660:Semantics; D013334:Students; D013997:Time Factors; D014495:Universities; D014825:Vocabulary