Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T17:55:22.116Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effectiveness of computer-assisted argument mapping for comprehension, recall, and retention

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 January 2018

Maryam Eftekhari  and
Elaheh Sotoudehnama
Maryam Eftekhari
Affiliation:
Department of Foreign Languages, Kashan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kashan, Iran (email: [email protected])
Elaheh Sotoudehnama
Affiliation:
Alzahra University, Iran (email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Compared to traditional pen-and-paper presentation of information, computer-assisted argument mapping seems to be more efficient in developing lower order thinking skills such as memory and comprehension. The present study investigated the impact of argument map construction and reading via computer versus pen and paper on English as a foreign language (EFL) majors’ comprehension, recall, and retention of argumentative texts. To this end, 120 Iranian EFL undergraduates were divided into low and high proficiency levels after taking a language proficiency test. Next, they were randomly assigned to two experimental groups; each group received 12 sessions of argument mapping instruction, one via computer and the other via pen and paper. At the end of the term, participants randomly received two argument map sizes (small vs. large) and were given 15 minutes to read the maps. Then tests of recall and comprehension relevant to the maps were administered, followed by a test of retention within a two-week interval. The results revealed that after controlling for spatial and verbal covariates, the type of treatment had a significant effect on recall, retention, and comprehension, with the software group outperforming the pen-and-paper group; however, proficiency level and argument size did not show any significant effect.

Keywords

computer-assisted argument mappingrecallretentioncomprehensioncognitive loadEFL
Type
Regular papers
Information
ReCALL , Volume 30 , Issue 3 , September 2018 , pp. 337 - 354
Copyright
© European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amin, H. and Malik, A. S. (2013) Human memory retention and recall processes: A review of EEG and fMRI studies. Neurosciences, 18(4): 330–344.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (1983) The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Armbruster, B. B., Anderson, T. H. and Ostertag, J. (1987) Does text structure/summarization instruction facilitate learning from expository text? Reading Research Quarterly, 22(3): 331–346. https://doi.org/10.2307/747972 Google Scholar
Arthur, W. Jr., Bennett, W. Jr., Stanush, P. L. and McNelly, T. L. (1998) Factors that influence skill decay and retention: A quantitative review and analysis. Human Performance, 11(1): 57–101. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1101_3 Google Scholar
Asadollahfam, H. and Shiri, P. (2013) The impact of semantic mapping instruction on Iranian EFL learners’ reading comprehension of expository texts. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 1(1): 95–106.Google Scholar
Bankó, É. M. and Vidnyánszky, Z. (2010) Retention interval affects visual short-term memory encoding. Journal of Neurophysiology, 103(3): 1425–1430. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00868.2009 Google Scholar
Bennett, G. K., Seashore, H. G. and Wesman, A. G. (1986) Differential Aptitude Tests. Windsor, UK: Psychological Corporation & NFER-Nelson.Google Scholar
Berkowitz, S. J. (1986) Effects of instruction in text organization on sixth-grade students’ memory for expository reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(2): 161–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/747843 Google Scholar
Bernstein, D. A. (2016) Psychology: Foundations and frontiers. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Butchart, S., Forster, D., Gold, I., Bigelow, J., Korb, K., Oppy, G. and Serrenti, A. (2009) Improving critical thinking using web based argument mapping exercises with automated feedback. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2): 268–291. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1154 Google Scholar
Cataldo, M. G. and Oakhill, J. (2000) Why are poor comprehenders inefficient searchers? An investigation into the effects of text representation and spatial memory on the ability to locate information in text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4): 791–799. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.4.791 Google Scholar
Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T. and Rohrer, D. (2006) Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132: 354–380. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354 Google Scholar
Colom, R., Abad, F. J., Rebollo, I. and Shih, P. C. (2005) Memory span and general intelligence: A latent-variable approach. Intelligence, 33(6): 623–642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2005.05.006 Google Scholar
Cowan, N. (2001) The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1): 87–114. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X01003922 Google Scholar
Craik, F. I. M. and Lockhart, R. S. (1972) Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal behavior, 11: 671–684. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X Google Scholar
Davies, M. (2009) Computer-assisted argument mapping: A Rationale approach. Higher Education, 58(6): 799–820. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9226-9 Google Scholar
Davies, M. (2011) Concept mapping, mind mapping, and argument mapping: What are the differences and do they matter? Higher Education, 62(3): 279–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9387-6 Google Scholar
Davies, M. (2012) Computer-aided argument mapping and the teaching of critical thinking: Part I. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 27(2): 15–30. https://doi.org/10.5840/inquiryct20122729 Google Scholar
Dudeney, G. (2007) The internet and the language classroom: A practical guide for teachers (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dwyer, C. P. (2011) The evaluation of argument mapping as a learning tool. National University of Ireland, Galway, unpublished PhD. http://hdl.handle.net/10379/2617 Google Scholar
Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J. and Stewart, I. (2010) The evaluation of argument mapping as a learning tool: Comparing the effects of map reading versus text reading on comprehension and recall of arguments. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 5(1): 16–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2009.05.001 Google Scholar
Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J. and Stewart, I. (2013) An examination of the effects of argument mapping on students’ memory and comprehension performance. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 8: 11–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2012.12.002 Google Scholar
Farhady, H., Hezaveh, F. S. and Hedayati, H. (2010) Reflections on foreign language education in Iran. TESL-EJ, 13(4): 1–18.Google Scholar
Farrand, P., Hussain, F. and Hennessy, E. (2002) The efficacy of the ‘mind map’ study technique. Medical Education, 36(5): 426–431. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01205.x Google Scholar
Feldmann, U. and Stemmer, B. (1987) Think aloud a__retrospective da__in C-te__taking: Diffe__languages-diff__learners-sa__approaches? In Faerch, C. & Kasper, G. (eds.), Introspection in second language research. Clevendon: Multilingual Matters, 251–67.Google Scholar
Gobet, F. and Clarkson, G. (2004) Chunks in expert memory: Evidence for the magical number four … or is it two? Memory, 12(6): 732–747. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210344000530 Google Scholar
Griffin, C. C., Malone, L. D. and Kameenui, E. J. (1995) Effects of graphic organizer instruction on fifth-grade students. Journal of Educational Research, 89(2): 98–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1995.9941200 Google Scholar
Griffin, C. C. and Tulbert, B. L. (1995) The effect of graphic organizers on students’ comprehension and recall of expository text: A review of the research and implications for practice. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 11(1): 73–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057356950110106 Google Scholar
Harrell, M. (2004) The improvement of critical thinking skills in what philosophy is (Technical Report No. CMU-PHIL-158). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University. http://repository.cmu.edu/philosophy/126 Google Scholar
Harrell, M. (2005) Using argument diagramming software in the classroom. Teaching Philosophy, 28(2): 163–177. https://doi.org/10.5840/teachphil200528222 Google Scholar
Jiang, X. and Grabe, W. (2007) Graphic organizers in reading instruction: Research findings and issues. Reading in a Foreign Language, 19(1): 34–55.Google Scholar
Jiang, Y., Olson, I. R. and Chun, M. M. (2000) Organization of visual short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(3): 683–702. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.26.3.683 Google Scholar
Keshavarz, M. H., Atai, M. R. and Ahmadi, H. (2007) Content schemata, linguistic simplification, and EFL readers’ comprehension and recall. Reading in a Foreign Language, 19(1): 19–33.Google Scholar
Lindsey, R., Mozer, M. C., Cepeda, N. J and Pashler, H (2009) Optimizing memory retention with cognitive models. In Howes, A., Peebles, D. and Cooper, R. (eds, Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Cognitive Modeling (ICCM). Manchester, UK: Laird.Google Scholar
Mackey, A. and Gass, S. M. (2005) Second language research: Methodology and design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R. and Brønnick, K. (2013) Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 58: 61–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.12.002 Google Scholar
Manoli, P. and Papadopoulou, M. (2012) Graphic organizers as a reading strategy: Research findings and issues. Creative Education, 3(3): 348–356. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2012.33055 Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (1984) Aids to text comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 19(1): 30–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461528409529279 Google Scholar
Mehrpour, S. and Riazi, A. (2004) The impact of text length on EFL students’ reading comprehension. The Asian EFL Journal, 6(3): 235–243. http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/september_04_sm_ar.php Google Scholar
Meyer, B. J. F., Brandt, D. M. and Bluth, G. J. (1980) Use of top-level structure in text: Key for reading comprehension of ninth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 16(1): 72–103. https://doi.org/10.2307/747349 Google Scholar
Miller, G. A. (1956) The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2): 81–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043158 Google Scholar
Monk, P. (2001, March 16) Mapping the future of argument. Australian Financial Review, 8–9.Google Scholar
Naylor, J. C. and Briggs, G. E. (1963) Effect of rehearsal of temporal and spatial aspects on the long-term retention of a procedural skill. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47(2): 120–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0040215 Google Scholar
Oliver, K. (2009) An investigation of concept mapping to improve the reading comprehension of science texts. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(5): 402–414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9157-3 Google Scholar
Paivio, A. (1983) The empirical case for dual coding. In Yuille, J. C. (ed.), Imagery, memory and cognition: Essays in honor of Allan Paivio. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 307–332.Google Scholar
Peterson, D. J. and Berryhill, M. E. (2013) The Gestalt principle of similarity benefits visual working memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(6): 1282–1289. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0460-x Google Scholar
Peterson, L. R. and Peterson, M. I. (1959) Short-term retention of individual verbal items. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58: 193–198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0049234 Google Scholar
Pollock, E., Chandler, P. and Sweller, J. (2002) Assimilating complex information. Learning and Instruction, 12(1): 61–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00016-0 Google Scholar
Richland, L. E., Linn, M. C. and Bjork, R. A. (2007) Instruction. In Durso, F. T., Nickerson, R. S., Dumais, S., Lewandowsky, S. & Perfect, T. J. (eds.), Handbook of applied cognition (2nd ed.). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, 555–583. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470713181.ch21.Google Scholar
Sadeghi, K. and Taghavi, E. (2014) The relationship between semantic mapping instruction, reading comprehension and recall of Iranian undergraduates reading English texts. MEXTESOL Journal, 38(1): 1–13.Google Scholar
Safari, P. and Pourhashemi, M. R. (2012) Toward an empowering pedagogy: Is there room for critical pedagogy in educational system of Iran? Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(12): 2548–2555. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.12.2548-2555 Google Scholar
Safari, P. and Sahragard, R. (2015) Iranian EFL teachers’ challenges with the new ELT program after the reform: From dream to reality. Khazar Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 18(4): 65–88.Google Scholar
Schreiber, J. B. and Verdi, M. (2003) Dual coding and conjoint retention: Past, present, and future. Alternation, 10(1): 250–270.Google Scholar
Stearns, S. C. (2012) Integration of technology into the classroom: Effects on reading comprehension. Southern Illinois University, unpublished Master’s thesis. http://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/gs_rp/248/ Google Scholar
Suzuki, A., Sato, T. and Awazu, S. (2008) Graphic display of linguistic information in English as a foreign language reading. TESOL Quarterly, 42(4): 591–616. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00150.x Google Scholar
Sweller, J. (2010) Cognitive load theory: Recent theoretical advances. In Plass, J. L., Moreno, R. & Brünken, R. (eds.), Cognitive load theory. New York: Cambridge University Press, 29–47. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511844744.004 Google Scholar
Tulving, E. (1984) Precis of elements of episodic memory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7(2): 223–268. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0004440X Google Scholar
Van Gelder, T. (2000) Learning to reason: A Reason!-able approach. In Davis, C., van Gelder, T. J. & Wales, R. (eds.), Cognitive Science in Australia, 2000: Proceedings of the Fifth Australasian Cognitive Science Society Conference. Adelaide: Causal. http://http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:fMkxz98pOzoJ:citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.34.1574%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf+&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ir Google Scholar
Van Gelder, T. (2002, Fall) Argument mapping with Reason!Able. The American Philosophical Association Newsletter on Philosophy and Computers, 2(1): 85–90. http://www.philosophy.unimelb.edu.au/reason Google Scholar
Van Gelder, T. (2003) Enhancing deliberation through computer supported argument visualization. In Kirschner, P. A., Buckingham Shum, S. J. & Carr, C. S. (eds.), Visualizing argumentation: Software tools for collaborative and educational sense-making. London: Springer, 97–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0037-9_5 Google Scholar
Van Gelder, T. (2005) Teaching critical thinking: Some lessons from cognitive science. College Teaching, 53(1): 41–46. https://dx.doi.org/10.3200/CTCH.53.1.41-48 Google Scholar
Van Gelder, T. (2007) The rationale for Rationale. Law, Probability & Risk, 6: 23–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgm032 Google Scholar
Vekiri, I. (2002) What is the value of graphical displays in learning? Educational Psychology Review, 14(3): 261–312. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016064429161 Google Scholar
Watson, S. M. R., Gable, R. A., Gear, S. B. and Hughes, K. C. (2012) Evidence-based strategies for improving the reading comprehension of secondary students: Implications for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27(2): 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2012.00353.x Google Scholar
Wittrock, M. C. (1992) Knowledge acquisition and comprehension. In Alkin, M. C. (ed.), Encyclopedia of educational research (6th ed.). New York: Macmillan, 699–705.Google Scholar
Woodman, G. F., Vecera, S. P. and Luck, S. J. (2003) Perceptual organization influences visual working memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10(1): 80–87. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196470 Google Scholar