Efficient Text Summarization Costs and Benefits
Twenty-four undergraduate students were asked to read a 167-word expository text about Dutch elm disease and to write a summary of the text. Five days later, they were asked to complete a sentence-recognition task and to verbalize components of a successful text summary. Efficiency of summarization...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of educational research (Washington, D.C.) D.C.), 1982-05, Vol.75 (5), p.275-279 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 279 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 275 |
container_title | The Journal of educational research (Washington, D.C.) |
container_volume | 75 |
creator | Garner, Ruth |
description | Twenty-four undergraduate students were asked to read a 167-word expository text about Dutch elm disease and to write a summary of the text. Five days later, they were asked to complete a sentence-recognition task and to verbalize components of a successful text summary. Efficiency of summarization (a proportion of number of judged-important ideas to total number of words) was assessed, and high-efficient and low-efficient summarizers were compared on recognition and verbalization performance. An important finding of the study was that high-efficient students "recognized" true-to-text synthesis statements, which did not appear in the original text, far more frequently than low-efficient students, but also failed to strongly reject statements inconsistent with low-importance, in-text information. It appeared, within the study, that these students not only summarized efficiently, but also stored information in memory efficiently (i.e., in a highly streamlined, condensed manner). |
doi_str_mv | 10.1080/00220671.1982.10885394 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1080_00220671_1982_10885394</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>27539909</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>27539909</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-438e14b269e30b2c3bc30fc54c6edfb4755de4ae6688ae52ee85f268e3fc35e13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUEtLAzEQDqJgrf4EZcHztnk3OdZSH1DwYD2HbHYCW9pNTVK0_np3WevVucww32OGD6E7gicEKzzFmFIsZ2RCtKL9Sgmm-RkaEc1x2SHiHI16Uj-TS3SV0gZ3NaNqhKZL7xvXQJuLNXzl4u2w29nYfNvchLZYhJRTYdu6eIAWfJPTNbrwdpvg5reP0fvjcr14LlevTy-L-ap0TJJccqaA8IpKDQxX1LHKMeyd4E5C7Ss-E6IGbkFKpSwICqCEp1IB844JIGyM7gfffQwfB0jZbMIhtt1JQ6jGXEsxEx1LDiwXQ0oRvNnHpvv_aAg2fTjmFI7pwzGncDrh7SDcpBzin4p2nlpj3eHzAW9aH-LOfoa4rU22x22IPtrWNcmwf278AMondCY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1290496575</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Efficient Text Summarization Costs and Benefits</title><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><source>JSTOR</source><creator>Garner, Ruth</creator><creatorcontrib>Garner, Ruth</creatorcontrib><description>Twenty-four undergraduate students were asked to read a 167-word expository text about Dutch elm disease and to write a summary of the text. Five days later, they were asked to complete a sentence-recognition task and to verbalize components of a successful text summary. Efficiency of summarization (a proportion of number of judged-important ideas to total number of words) was assessed, and high-efficient and low-efficient summarizers were compared on recognition and verbalization performance. An important finding of the study was that high-efficient students "recognized" true-to-text synthesis statements, which did not appear in the original text, far more frequently than low-efficient students, but also failed to strongly reject statements inconsistent with low-importance, in-text information. It appeared, within the study, that these students not only summarized efficiently, but also stored information in memory efficiently (i.e., in a highly streamlined, condensed manner).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-0671</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1940-0675</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/00220671.1982.10885394</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bloomington, Ill: Routledge</publisher><subject>Fungi ; Graduate students ; Infections ; Memory ; Memory recall ; Reading ; Sentences ; Summarization ; Teachers ; Verbalization</subject><ispartof>The Journal of educational research (Washington, D.C.), 1982-05, Vol.75 (5), p.275-279</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor & Francis</rights><rights>Copyright 1982 Helen Dwight Reid Educational Foundation</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-438e14b269e30b2c3bc30fc54c6edfb4755de4ae6688ae52ee85f268e3fc35e13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-438e14b269e30b2c3bc30fc54c6edfb4755de4ae6688ae52ee85f268e3fc35e13</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/27539909$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/27539909$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,804,27871,27926,27927,58019,58252</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Garner, Ruth</creatorcontrib><title>Efficient Text Summarization Costs and Benefits</title><title>The Journal of educational research (Washington, D.C.)</title><description>Twenty-four undergraduate students were asked to read a 167-word expository text about Dutch elm disease and to write a summary of the text. Five days later, they were asked to complete a sentence-recognition task and to verbalize components of a successful text summary. Efficiency of summarization (a proportion of number of judged-important ideas to total number of words) was assessed, and high-efficient and low-efficient summarizers were compared on recognition and verbalization performance. An important finding of the study was that high-efficient students "recognized" true-to-text synthesis statements, which did not appear in the original text, far more frequently than low-efficient students, but also failed to strongly reject statements inconsistent with low-importance, in-text information. It appeared, within the study, that these students not only summarized efficiently, but also stored information in memory efficiently (i.e., in a highly streamlined, condensed manner).</description><subject>Fungi</subject><subject>Graduate students</subject><subject>Infections</subject><subject>Memory</subject><subject>Memory recall</subject><subject>Reading</subject><subject>Sentences</subject><subject>Summarization</subject><subject>Teachers</subject><subject>Verbalization</subject><issn>0022-0671</issn><issn>1940-0675</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1982</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>0R3</sourceid><sourceid>HYQOX</sourceid><sourceid>K30</sourceid><sourceid>~OC</sourceid><sourceid>~PO</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUEtLAzEQDqJgrf4EZcHztnk3OdZSH1DwYD2HbHYCW9pNTVK0_np3WevVucww32OGD6E7gicEKzzFmFIsZ2RCtKL9Sgmm-RkaEc1x2SHiHI16Uj-TS3SV0gZ3NaNqhKZL7xvXQJuLNXzl4u2w29nYfNvchLZYhJRTYdu6eIAWfJPTNbrwdpvg5reP0fvjcr14LlevTy-L-ap0TJJccqaA8IpKDQxX1LHKMeyd4E5C7Ss-E6IGbkFKpSwICqCEp1IB844JIGyM7gfffQwfB0jZbMIhtt1JQ6jGXEsxEx1LDiwXQ0oRvNnHpvv_aAg2fTjmFI7pwzGncDrh7SDcpBzin4p2nlpj3eHzAW9aH-LOfoa4rU22x22IPtrWNcmwf278AMondCY</recordid><startdate>19820501</startdate><enddate>19820501</enddate><creator>Garner, Ruth</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Heldref Publications</general><general>Public School Pub. Co. for the University of Illinois, Bureau of Educational Research</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0R3</scope><scope>ABKTN</scope><scope>EOLOZ</scope><scope>FKUCP</scope><scope>HYQOX</scope><scope>HZAIM</scope><scope>JSICY</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope><scope>~OB</scope><scope>~OC</scope><scope>~OG</scope><scope>~PM</scope><scope>~PO</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19820501</creationdate><title>Efficient Text Summarization Costs and Benefits</title><author>Garner, Ruth</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-438e14b269e30b2c3bc30fc54c6edfb4755de4ae6688ae52ee85f268e3fc35e13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1982</creationdate><topic>Fungi</topic><topic>Graduate students</topic><topic>Infections</topic><topic>Memory</topic><topic>Memory recall</topic><topic>Reading</topic><topic>Sentences</topic><topic>Summarization</topic><topic>Teachers</topic><topic>Verbalization</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Garner, Ruth</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest_PAO Collection 1(与CASHL共建)</collection><collection>Periodicals Archive Online JSTOR Titles</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 01</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 04</collection><collection>ProQuest Historical Periodicals</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 26</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 36</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><collection>PAO Collection 1</collection><collection>Periodicals Archive Online Collection 1</collection><collection>Periodicals Archive Online (1770-1995) [full page reproduction]</collection><collection>Periodicals Archive Online JISC Collection</collection><collection>Periodicals Archive Online Liberal Arts Collection 2</collection><jtitle>The Journal of educational research (Washington, D.C.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Garner, Ruth</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Efficient Text Summarization Costs and Benefits</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of educational research (Washington, D.C.)</jtitle><date>1982-05-01</date><risdate>1982</risdate><volume>75</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>275</spage><epage>279</epage><pages>275-279</pages><issn>0022-0671</issn><eissn>1940-0675</eissn><abstract>Twenty-four undergraduate students were asked to read a 167-word expository text about Dutch elm disease and to write a summary of the text. Five days later, they were asked to complete a sentence-recognition task and to verbalize components of a successful text summary. Efficiency of summarization (a proportion of number of judged-important ideas to total number of words) was assessed, and high-efficient and low-efficient summarizers were compared on recognition and verbalization performance. An important finding of the study was that high-efficient students "recognized" true-to-text synthesis statements, which did not appear in the original text, far more frequently than low-efficient students, but also failed to strongly reject statements inconsistent with low-importance, in-text information. It appeared, within the study, that these students not only summarized efficiently, but also stored information in memory efficiently (i.e., in a highly streamlined, condensed manner).</abstract><cop>Bloomington, Ill</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/00220671.1982.10885394</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-0671 |
ispartof | The Journal of educational research (Washington, D.C.), 1982-05, Vol.75 (5), p.275-279 |
issn | 0022-0671 1940-0675 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1080_00220671_1982_10885394 |
source | Periodicals Index Online; Alma/SFX Local Collection; JSTOR |
subjects | Fungi Graduate students Infections Memory Memory recall Reading Sentences Summarization Teachers Verbalization |
title | Efficient Text Summarization Costs and Benefits |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-17T16%3A25%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Efficient%20Text%20Summarization%20Costs%20and%20Benefits&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20educational%20research%20(Washington,%20D.C.)&rft.au=Garner,%20Ruth&rft.date=1982-05-01&rft.volume=75&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=275&rft.epage=279&rft.pages=275-279&rft.issn=0022-0671&rft.eissn=1940-0675&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/00220671.1982.10885394&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_cross%3E27539909%3C/jstor_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1290496575&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=27539909&rfr_iscdi=true |