No Effect of Writing Advice on Reading Comprehension

Laura Winther Balling Copenhagen Business School

Abstract

This article considers text comprehension through the integrated perspectives of language processing research and practical writing advice as expressed in writing guides and language policies. Such guides for instance include advice to use active constructions instead of passives and sentences instead of nominalizations. These recommended and problem constructions and two other contrasts were investigated in an eye-tracking experiment where 27 students read four authentic texts where the target constructions had been manipulated. A mixed-effects regression analysis showed no difference between recommended and problem constructions, while several control variables were significant. This result indicates that the linguistic manipulations are not in themselves crucial to text comprehension, and it is hypothesized that the central aspect for text comprehension is how the linguistic manipulations support cohesion and coherence in the text.

Journal
Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Published
2018-01-01
DOI
10.1177/0047281617696983
Open Access
OA PDF Bronze

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (2)

  1. Written Communication
  2. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Also cites 14 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.24989/fs.v35i1-2.1340
  2. 10.1017/S1366728911000733
  3. 10.1075/ts.4.1.08bal
  4. 10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
  5. 10.1007/BF01069048
  6. 10.1515/9783112316009
  7. 10.1006/jmla.1994.1034
  8. 10.1191/0267658305sr257oa
  9. 10.1037/0033-295X.87.4.329
  10. 10.1016/j.jml.2011.03.002
  11. 10.1207/s1532690xci1401_1
  12. 10.1080/17470216408416385
  13. 10.1017/S1360674309990153
  14. 10.1016/S0022-5371(66)80023-3
CrossRef global citation count: 5 View in citation network →