Correcting Text Production Errors: Isolating the Effects of Writing Mode From Error Span, Input Mode, and Lexicality

Mariëlle Leijten University of Antwerp ; Luuk Van Waes University of Antwerp ; Sarah Ransdell Nova Southeastern University

Abstract

Error analysis involves detecting, diagnosing, and correcting discrepancies between the text produced so far (TPSF) and the writers mental representation of what the text should be. The use of different writing modes, like keyboard-based word processing and speech recognition, causes different type of errors during text production. While many factors determine the choice of error-correction strategy, cognitive effort is a major contributor to this choice. This research shows how cognitive effort during error analysis affects strategy choice and success as measured by a series of online text production measures. Text production is shown to be influenced most by error span, that is, whether the error spans more or less than two characters. Next, it is influenced by input mode, that is, whether the error has been generated by speech recognition or keyboard, and finally by lexicality, that is, whether the error comprises an existing word. Correction of larger error spans is more successful than that of smaller errors. Writers impose a wise speed accuracy trade-off during large error spans since correction is better, but preparation times (time to first action) and production times take longer, and interference reaction times are slower. During large error spans, there is a tendency to opt for error correction first, especially when errors occurred in the condition in which the TPSF is not preceded by an auditory prompt. In general, the addition of speech frees the cognitive demands of writing. Writers also opt more often to continue text production when the TPSF is presented auditorially first.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2010-04-01
DOI
10.1177/0741088309359139
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (3)

  1. Computers and Composition
  2. Written Communication
  3. Written Communication

References (54) · 3 in this index

  1. Alamargot, D., Dansac, C., Ros, C. & Chuy, M. ( 2005). Rédiger un texte procédural à partir de sources: Relat…
  2. Working memory
  3. 10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60452-1
  4. 10.2307/358261
  5. 10.1080/00207599408248175
Show all 54 →
  1. Written Communication
  2. 10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6
  3. 10.1037/0033-295X.102.2.211
  4. 10.1037/0096-1523.4.4.648
  5. 10.1177/001872088402600403
  6. 10.1207/s15327051hci0402_3
  7. Haas, C. ( 1989b). "Seeing it on the screen isn’t really seeing it": Computer writers’ reading problems. In G…
  8. 10.1023/A:1007989901667
  9. 10.1037/0022-0663.86.1.65
  10. Computers and Composition
  11. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal
  12. 10.1037/0033-295X.99.1.122
  13. 10.1037/0278-7393.14.2.355
  14. Kellogg, R.T. ( 1996). A model of working memory in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. E. Ransdell (Eds.), The scien…
  15. 10.2307/1423513
  16. 10.2307/4149005
  17. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.02.005
  18. 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199810)12:5<505::AID-ACP536>3.0.CO;2-D
  19. Writing and speech recognition: Observing error correction strategies of professional wri…
  20. 10.1016/j.intcom.2005.01.005
  21. Leijten, M. & Van Waes, L. ( 2006a). Inputlog: New perspectives on the logging of on-line writing processes i…
  22. Leijten, M. & Van Waes, L. ( 2006b). Repair strategies in writing with speech recognition: The effect of expe…
  23. Levy, C.M. & Marek, P. ( 1999). Testing components of Kellogg’s multicomponent models of working memory in wr…
  24. Levy, C.M. & Ransdell, S.E. (2001). Writing with concurrent memory loads. In T. Olive & C. M. Levy (Eds.), Co…
  25. Lindgren, E. & Sullivan, K.P.H. (2006). Analyzing on-line revision . In K. P. H. Sullivan & E. Lindgren (Eds.…
  26. MacArthur, C.A. ( 2006). Assistive technology for writing: Tools for struggling writers. In L. Van Waes, M. L…
  27. 10.1007/BF01464076
  28. 10.1027/1016-9040.9.1.32
  29. 10.3758/BF03194960
  30. 10.1080/00207590244000089
  31. 10.1007/978-94-007-1048-1_3
  32. 10.1037/0022-0663.96.2.337
  33. 10.1108/S1572-6304(2006)0000017004
  34. Writers’ shift between error correction and sentence composing: Competing and the executi…
  35. 10.1080/00140137808931800
  36. 10.1080/14640747808400679
  37. Writing reading and speaking memory spans and the importance of resource flexibility
  38. 10.1023/A:1020851300668
  39. Journal of Experimental Psychology
  40. It’s about time: Temporal aspects of cognitive processes in text production
  41. Computers and Composition
  42. 10.1037/0096-3445.125.1.4
  43. 10.1016/0001-6918(69)90055-9
  44. Torrance, M. & Galbraith, D. ( 2006). The processing demands of writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham , & J.…
  45. 10.1006/jmla.1998.2574
  46. Van den Bergh, H. & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1996). The dynamics of composing: Modelling writing process data. In C. …
  47. Van Waes, L. & Leijten, M. ( 2006). Logging writing processes with Inputlog. In L. Van Waes, M. Leijten , & C…
  48. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal
  49. 10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00121-2