Understanding abstract expository texts.

Full Abstract

BACKGROUND:
This study dealt with the question whether abstract concepts and rules can be directly taught or can only be explained by using examples. The issue, known as Meno's Paradox, was addressed in the context of understanding expository texts.

AIMS:
We set out to show the indispensability of examples in the process of acquiring knowledge of concepts and rules. By blocking any possibility of linking concepts to examples we hoped to show the understanding of abstract concepts is impossible without a concrete context of interpretation.

SAMPLES:
In two experiments, secondary school students (17 years of age) and undergraduate university students were asked to study expository texts with no examples or with many examples.

METHODS:
In Experiment 1, two existing texts were manipulated by either adding examples or replacing specific concepts by more ambiguous concepts. In Experiment 2, two expository texts (one with rules, one with examples) on the law of large numbers were developed. Apart from that, a questionnaire to assess students' habit of concrete elaboration whilst studying expository texts was administered.

RESULTS:
Experiment 1 revealed that an expository text with ambiguous terms is difficult to understand. This evidence supported our claim that a concrete context of interpretation is indispensable. However, there was no difference in understanding of texts with many or few examples. An explanation might be that students were able to think of relevant examples themselves. Evidence for this active way of text comprehension was found in Experiment 2. An interaction between content (abstract, concrete) and learning style (high or low on concrete elaboration) showed up. Students high on concrete elaboration understood the abstract text better than students low on concrete elaboration. The reverse held for the concrete text.

CONCLUSION:
So, support was found for the indispensability of concrete examples, which should be available in the reader's memory or provided in the text.

Learn Faster Today Improve your study skills

Author information

Author/s: Beishuizen, Jos (J); Stoutjesdijk, Evelien (E); Spuijbroek, Sandra (S); Bouwmeester, Samantha (S); van der Geest, Hanneke (H);

Affiliation: Department of Developmental and Educational Psychology, Leiden University, The Netherlands. beishuiz(-atsign-)rulfsw.LeidenUniv.NL

Journal and publication information

Publication Type: Comparative Study; Journal Article

Journal: The British journal of educational psychology (Br J Educ Psychol), published in England. (Language: eng)

Reference: 2002-Jun; vol 72 (issue Pt 2) : pp 279-97

Dates: Created 2002/05/24; Completed 2002/08/19; Revised 2006/11/15;

PMID: 12028613, status: MEDLINE (last retrieval date: 12/26/2008)

Sourced from the National Library of Medicine. Abstract text and other information may be subject to copyright.

External Links for this article (including full text providers, if available):

Click Electronic Full-text Provider Links to see options for finding the electronic full text links to this article. Note there may be a subscription or fee required for access to the full text. See our FAQ for information on finding FREE full text articles.

This article may also be located in paper journal collections available in many libraries. Use the Journal and Publication Information above to find the full article.

MeSH headings (categories)

This article was linked to the MESH Headings shown below.

Humans
Male
Mental Recall
Reading
Students - psychology

These are the highest related articles currently in the database:

See 100+ related articles.