The purpose of the current research was to learn more about the differences between subgroups of poor comprehenders. Using a think-aloud and recall procedure the differences in the online process...Show moreThe purpose of the current research was to learn more about the differences between subgroups of poor comprehenders. Using a think-aloud and recall procedure the differences in the online process of inference making and the offline product of reading comprehension, the mental representation of narrative and informational texts, have been investigated in fourth and fifth grade Dutch speaking students. Results from the think-aloud procedure replicated findings from previous research. Two subgroups of poor comprehenders have been found which differ in inference making. First, the paraphrasers primarily make text repetitions while reading a text. Second, the elaborators make connecting and elaborative inferences comparable to good comprehenders. However, unlike the good comprehenders, the elaborators make more invalid inferences. Results from the recall procedure indicated that the subgroups of poor comprehenders do not differ in the mental representation they construct after reading both narrative and informative texts. The current research confirms that poor comprehenders do not form a homogenous group, but differ in online comprehension processes. However, next to individual differences also the existence of subgroups of poor comprehenders has been confirmed. Further research is needed to investigate the instructional and educational validity of the subgroups of poor comprehenders.Show less
The inference making ability of good and poor comprehenders were assessed by means of a think-aloud procedure. Inference making is the online process of connecting different parts of a text and the...Show moreThe inference making ability of good and poor comprehenders were assessed by means of a think-aloud procedure. Inference making is the online process of connecting different parts of a text and the connection of parts of the texts with background knowledge. Special interest of the current research was the role of vocabulary and working memory in inference making ability. The results indicated that good and poor comprehenders differ in their inference making ability. Poor comprehenders make more text repetitions while good comprehenders make more elaborative inferences. This seems to be influenced by vocabulary and working memory. Good comprehenders have a greater vocabulary knowledge and a greater working memory capacity and this stimulates elaborative inferencing. Poor comprehenders have less vocabulary knowledge and working memory capacity and this limitates their ability to make elaborative inferences. Vocabulary knowledge and working memory capacity affects the inference making ability and thereby affects the construction of a coherent mental representation of the text.Show less
