The Effect of Variations in Text Summarization Opportunities on Test Performance
The performance of college students who wrote no, 1, or 2 summaries while studying a text for a recall (fill-in-the-blanks) and recognition (multiple-choice) test was compared. Students in the 3 groups were matched on total amount of time spent studying. Performance on recall and recognition measure...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of experimental education 1995-01, Vol.63 (2), p.89-95 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 95 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 89 |
| container_title | The Journal of experimental education |
| container_volume | 63 |
| creator | Foos, Paul W. |
| description | The performance of college students who wrote no, 1, or 2 summaries while studying a text for a recall (fill-in-the-blanks) and recognition (multiple-choice) test was compared. Students in the 3 groups were matched on total amount of time spent studying. Performance on recall and recognition measures for students who wrote only 1 summary of an entire text was superior to that of students who wrote no or 2 summaries (1 for each half of the text). These results (a) support the hypothesis that less frequent summarizing, which requires greater effort, produces better performance; (b) rule out total study time as an explanation for the previously found advantage of summarization; and (c) show that the effect can be obtained for recognition as well as recall measures. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1080/00220973.1995.9943814 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_pasca</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pascalfrancis_primary_3715663</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ509287</ericid><jstor_id>20152440</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>20152440</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c422t-33c5595f53c54fa0edad6ce4d10f21ad8c18fe3a775aae843ec54ba2347a064f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE2LFDEQhoMoOK7-AxcCirceK1_dyU1Zxi8WdsHRa4jpBDP0dMYkzbr-etPTs3PwYC4F9T5V9eZF6JLAmoCEtwCUgurYmigl1kpxJgl_hFZEcWiglewxWs1MM0NP0bOcd1Afk7BCt9ufDm-8d7bg6PF3k4IpIY4ZhxFv3e-Cv077fe3-ObbxzeEQU5nGUILLOM5MLvjWJR_T3ozWPUdPvBmye3GqF-jbh8326lNzffPx89X768ZySkvDmBVCCS9q5d6A603fWsd7Ap4S00tLpHfMdJ0wxknOXOV-GMp4Z6Dlnl2gN8veQ4q_pmpC70O2bhjM6OKUtZBUKWhJBV_9A-7ilMbqTZOKKElIyyolFsqmmHNyXh9SqP--1wT0nLJ-SFnPKetTynXu9Wm7ydYMPtUMQj4Ps46I9rj-5YK5FOxZ3XwRoKjsqny5yLtcYjrrFIignEPV3y16GI8538U09LqY-yGmh5Ps_0b_Al_Toxs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1299981163</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Effect of Variations in Text Summarization Opportunities on Test Performance</title><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Education Source</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Foos, Paul W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Foos, Paul W.</creatorcontrib><description>The performance of college students who wrote no, 1, or 2 summaries while studying a text for a recall (fill-in-the-blanks) and recognition (multiple-choice) test was compared. Students in the 3 groups were matched on total amount of time spent studying. Performance on recall and recognition measures for students who wrote only 1 summary of an entire text was superior to that of students who wrote no or 2 summaries (1 for each half of the text). These results (a) support the hypothesis that less frequent summarizing, which requires greater effort, produces better performance; (b) rule out total study time as an explanation for the previously found advantage of summarization; and (c) show that the effect can be obtained for recognition as well as recall measures.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-0973</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1940-0683</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/00220973.1995.9943814</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JEXEAI</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis Group</publisher><subject>Abstracting ; Academic learning ; College Students ; Diverse points ; Education and psychology ; Educational sciences ; Higher Education ; Learning and Instruction ; Learning strategies ; Multiple Choice Tests ; Psychology and learning ; Recall (Psychology) ; Recognition (Psychology) ; Study ; Summarization ; Test Results ; Test scores ; Time Factors (Learning) ; Time on Task ; Writing improvement ; Writing tests</subject><ispartof>The Journal of experimental education, 1995-01, Vol.63 (2), p.89-95</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 1995</rights><rights>Copyright 1995 Helen Dwight Reid Educational Foundation</rights><rights>1995 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c422t-33c5595f53c54fa0edad6ce4d10f21ad8c18fe3a775aae843ec54ba2347a064f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c422t-33c5595f53c54fa0edad6ce4d10f21ad8c18fe3a775aae843ec54ba2347a064f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20152440$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/20152440$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,801,4012,27856,27910,27911,27912,58004,58237</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ509287$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=3715663$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Foos, Paul W.</creatorcontrib><title>The Effect of Variations in Text Summarization Opportunities on Test Performance</title><title>The Journal of experimental education</title><description>The performance of college students who wrote no, 1, or 2 summaries while studying a text for a recall (fill-in-the-blanks) and recognition (multiple-choice) test was compared. Students in the 3 groups were matched on total amount of time spent studying. Performance on recall and recognition measures for students who wrote only 1 summary of an entire text was superior to that of students who wrote no or 2 summaries (1 for each half of the text). These results (a) support the hypothesis that less frequent summarizing, which requires greater effort, produces better performance; (b) rule out total study time as an explanation for the previously found advantage of summarization; and (c) show that the effect can be obtained for recognition as well as recall measures.</description><subject>Abstracting</subject><subject>Academic learning</subject><subject>College Students</subject><subject>Diverse points</subject><subject>Education and psychology</subject><subject>Educational sciences</subject><subject>Higher Education</subject><subject>Learning and Instruction</subject><subject>Learning strategies</subject><subject>Multiple Choice Tests</subject><subject>Psychology and learning</subject><subject>Recall (Psychology)</subject><subject>Recognition (Psychology)</subject><subject>Study</subject><subject>Summarization</subject><subject>Test Results</subject><subject>Test scores</subject><subject>Time Factors (Learning)</subject><subject>Time on Task</subject><subject>Writing improvement</subject><subject>Writing tests</subject><issn>0022-0973</issn><issn>1940-0683</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1995</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>HYQOX</sourceid><sourceid>K30</sourceid><sourceid>~OU</sourceid><sourceid>~OW</sourceid><sourceid>~PQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE2LFDEQhoMoOK7-AxcCirceK1_dyU1Zxi8WdsHRa4jpBDP0dMYkzbr-etPTs3PwYC4F9T5V9eZF6JLAmoCEtwCUgurYmigl1kpxJgl_hFZEcWiglewxWs1MM0NP0bOcd1Afk7BCt9ufDm-8d7bg6PF3k4IpIY4ZhxFv3e-Cv077fe3-ObbxzeEQU5nGUILLOM5MLvjWJR_T3ozWPUdPvBmye3GqF-jbh8326lNzffPx89X768ZySkvDmBVCCS9q5d6A603fWsd7Ap4S00tLpHfMdJ0wxknOXOV-GMp4Z6Dlnl2gN8veQ4q_pmpC70O2bhjM6OKUtZBUKWhJBV_9A-7ilMbqTZOKKElIyyolFsqmmHNyXh9SqP--1wT0nLJ-SFnPKetTynXu9Wm7ydYMPtUMQj4Ps46I9rj-5YK5FOxZ3XwRoKjsqny5yLtcYjrrFIignEPV3y16GI8538U09LqY-yGmh5Ps_0b_Al_Toxs</recordid><startdate>19950101</startdate><enddate>19950101</enddate><creator>Foos, Paul W.</creator><general>Taylor & Francis Group</general><general>Heldref Publications</general><general>Heldref</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ABKTN</scope><scope>HFIND</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>~OT</scope><scope>~OU</scope><scope>~OV</scope><scope>~OW</scope><scope>~PM</scope><scope>~PQ</scope><scope>7T9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19950101</creationdate><title>The Effect of Variations in Text Summarization Opportunities on Test Performance</title><author>Foos, Paul W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c422t-33c5595f53c54fa0edad6ce4d10f21ad8c18fe3a775aae843ec54ba2347a064f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1995</creationdate><topic>Abstracting</topic><topic>Academic learning</topic><topic>College Students</topic><topic>Diverse points</topic><topic>Education and psychology</topic><topic>Educational sciences</topic><topic>Higher Education</topic><topic>Learning and Instruction</topic><topic>Learning strategies</topic><topic>Multiple Choice Tests</topic><topic>Psychology and learning</topic><topic>Recall (Psychology)</topic><topic>Recognition (Psychology)</topic><topic>Study</topic><topic>Summarization</topic><topic>Test Results</topic><topic>Test scores</topic><topic>Time Factors (Learning)</topic><topic>Time on Task</topic><topic>Writing improvement</topic><topic>Writing tests</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Foos, Paul W.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Archive Online JSTOR Titles</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 16</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 2 (purchase pre Oct/2008)</collection><collection>Periodicals Archive Online Collection 2</collection><collection>PAO Collection 2</collection><collection>Periodicals Archive Online Collection 2.2</collection><collection>Periodicals Archive Online JISC Collection</collection><collection>Periodicals Archive Online Liberal Arts Collection 4</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>The Journal of experimental education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Foos, Paul W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ509287</ericid><atitle>The Effect of Variations in Text Summarization Opportunities on Test Performance</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of experimental education</jtitle><date>1995-01-01</date><risdate>1995</risdate><volume>63</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>89</spage><epage>95</epage><pages>89-95</pages><issn>0022-0973</issn><eissn>1940-0683</eissn><coden>JEXEAI</coden><abstract>The performance of college students who wrote no, 1, or 2 summaries while studying a text for a recall (fill-in-the-blanks) and recognition (multiple-choice) test was compared. Students in the 3 groups were matched on total amount of time spent studying. Performance on recall and recognition measures for students who wrote only 1 summary of an entire text was superior to that of students who wrote no or 2 summaries (1 for each half of the text). These results (a) support the hypothesis that less frequent summarizing, which requires greater effort, produces better performance; (b) rule out total study time as an explanation for the previously found advantage of summarization; and (c) show that the effect can be obtained for recognition as well as recall measures.</abstract><cop>Washington, DC</cop><pub>Taylor & Francis Group</pub><doi>10.1080/00220973.1995.9943814</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0022-0973 |
| ispartof | The Journal of experimental education, 1995-01, Vol.63 (2), p.89-95 |
| issn | 0022-0973 1940-0683 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pascalfrancis_primary_3715663 |
| source | Periodicals Index Online; Jstor Complete Legacy; Education Source; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Abstracting Academic learning College Students Diverse points Education and psychology Educational sciences Higher Education Learning and Instruction Learning strategies Multiple Choice Tests Psychology and learning Recall (Psychology) Recognition (Psychology) Study Summarization Test Results Test scores Time Factors (Learning) Time on Task Writing improvement Writing tests |
| title | The Effect of Variations in Text Summarization Opportunities on Test Performance |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T17%3A59%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_pasca&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Effect%20of%20Variations%20in%20Text%20Summarization%20Opportunities%20on%20Test%20Performance&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20experimental%20education&rft.au=Foos,%20Paul%20W.&rft.date=1995-01-01&rft.volume=63&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=89&rft.epage=95&rft.pages=89-95&rft.issn=0022-0973&rft.eissn=1940-0683&rft.coden=JEXEAI&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/00220973.1995.9943814&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_pasca%3E20152440%3C/jstor_pasca%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1299981163&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ509287&rft_jstor_id=20152440&rfr_iscdi=true |