zaangazowanie poznawcze_cośtam_dzieci_ADHD.pdf

2006, Vol. 42, No. 6, 1206–1219

Cognitive Engagement and Story Comprehension in Typically Developing

Children and Children With ADHD From Preschool

Through Elementary School

Elizabeth P. Lorch, Richard Milich, Clarese C. Astrin, and Kristen S. Berthiaume

University of Kentucky

The present study examined children’s cognitive engagement with television as a function of the

continuity of central or incidental content and whether this varied with age and clinical status. In

Experiment 1, 9- to 11-year-old children’s response times on a secondary task were slower the later a

probe occurred in a sequence of central events, and response times predicted recall. Experiment 2

extended these results to 6- to 8-year-old children. Experiment 3 revealed that children with attention-

deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) failed to show the pattern consistently observed for comparison

children. The results support the hypothesis that typically developing children build a representation

during viewing that reflects the causal structure of the televised story but that this skill is deficient in 4-

to 9-year-old children with ADHD.

Keywords: ADHD, cognitive engagement, secondary probe, attention

Supplemental data: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.42.6.1206.supp

Knowledge of children’s story comprehension has been in-

formed by theories of the comprehension process. A theme com-

mon to most theories is an emphasis on the causal and enabling

relations between events in a story, which define plot-relevant

events and give the story coherence (Ackerman, 1986; Black &

Bower, 1980; Graesser & Clark, 1985; Mandler & Johnson, 1977;

Trabasso, Secco, & van den Broek, 1984; van den Broek, 1997).

Characteristics of the causal structure of stories have been found to

predict a product of children’s comprehension—that is, memory

for story events (e.g., Trabasso et al., 1984; van den Broek, 1989;

van den Broek, Lorch, & Thurlow, 1996)—with effects becoming

stronger with age (Nezworski, Stein, & Trabasso, 1982; Schmidt &

Paris, 1983; van den Broek et al., 1996). However, much less

research has investigated the online processes children may engage

in to detect and use causal relations between events to build a

representation of a story (Ackerman, Paine, & Silver, 1991; Tra-

basso & Nickels, 1992; Trabasso, Stein, Rodkin, Munger, &

Baughn, 1992). One avenue of research that may contribute to

knowledge of children’s online story comprehension processes is

the study of systematic variations in children’s attention to tele-

vised stories (Anderson & Lorch, 1983; Huston & Wright, 1983).

The present series of studies builds on this line of research by

using a measure of moment-to-moment cognitive capacity usage to

investigate several questions. First, does children’s cognitive en-

gagement with a televised story vary as a function of the contin-

uation of plot-relevant content? Second, does this pattern differ as

a function of age? Finally, do children with documented attention

problems and story comprehension difficulties (i.e., diagnosed

with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder [ADHD]) differ in

cognitive engagement from comparison children?

Influences on Children’s Attention to Television

Several theoretical viewpoints on children’s television viewing

concur that children, from an early age, are active viewers whose

visual attention to television is guided by ongoing comprehension,

expectations, and purposes for viewing (Anderson & Lorch, 1983;

Huston & Wright, 1983; Salomon, 1983). For example, Anderson

and Lorch (1983) proposed that for young children, a look at the

television may begin in response to any of several possible rea-

sons, including stimuli that elicit orienting responses; formal fea-

tures that signal informative, appealing, child-relevant content

(Alwitt, Anderson, Lorch, & Levin, 1980); and cues derived from

the behavior of other children (Anderson, Lorch, Smith, Bradford,

& Levin, 1981). Once a look has begun, its continuation primarily

depends on the child’s ongoing judgments of whether program

content is comprehensible (Anderson, Lorch, Field, & Sanders,

1981; Lorch, Anderson, & Levin, 1979; Pingree, 1986).

Huston and Wright (1983) discussed similar factors as influ-

ences on visual attention but conceptualized a series of decisions

children make about whether to continue a look at the television.

At the beginning of a look, decisions are most heavily a function

of formal characteristics, once again those that are indicative of

informative, interesting, child-relevant content (Calvert, Huston,

Watkins, & Wright, 1982; Huston et al., 1981). If a look continues,

more extensive, deeper cognitive processing takes place, such that

a subsequent decision is affected by both current comprehension

Elizabeth P. Lorch, Richard Milich, Clarese C. Astrin, and Kristen S.

Berthiaume, Department of Psychology, University of Kentucky.

This research was supported by National Institute of Mental Health

Grant MH47386.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Elizabeth

P. Lorch, Department of Psychology, University of Kentucky, Lexington,

KY 40506-0044. E-mail: elorch@uky.edu

1206

Developmental Psychology

0012-1649/06/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0012-1649.42.6.1206

COGNITIVE ENGAGEMENT WITH TELEVISION

1207

and initial expectations about content (Campbell, Wright, & Hus-

ton, 1987; Rolandelli, Wright, Huston, & Eakins, 1991). As further

cycles occur, later decisions are increasingly influenced by deeper

processing and more elaborated expectations about story content

(Hawkins, Tapper, Bruce, & Pingree, 1995; Rolandelli et al.,

1991). In addition, Huston and Wright (1983) proposed that there

are changes in these cycles of decisions as development advances.

For younger children, the continuation of a look at the television

may be more dependent on superficial features of the program than

for older children, who are more likely to make elaborated deci-

sions on the basis of deeper processing of content (Rolandelli et

al., 1991).

These perspectives and their associated empirical support indi-

cate that children’s visual attention to television varies systemat-

ically in relation to program characteristics. Huston and Wright’s

(1983) perspective also suggests a context for the online process-

ing of television story structure. To the extent that children build

an ongoing representation of the interrelations among story events

during viewing, measures of attention may reveal effects of event

centrality, causal structure, and plot development.

Several investigations suggest such indications of children’s

online processing of structural features of television stories.

School-age children have been found to look at the television more

during presentation of material that adults rated as important (i.e.,

central) to the plot of the story than during material rated as low in

importance (Baer & Lorch, 1990; Lorch & Baer, 1997). Mead-

owcroft and Reeves (1989) obtained a related finding using a

secondary task technique to assess cognitive engagement with the

television program. The secondary task technique is based on the

assumptions that mental processing requires time and that central

processing capacity is limited (Basil, 1994; Kahneman, 1973).

Thus, the more attentional capacity is engaged by a continuous

primary task, such as viewing a television program, the less is

available for a secondary task, such as a keypress in response to an

occasional auditory tone (Britton, Graesser, Glynn, Hamilton, &

Penland, 1983; Britton & Tesser, 1982; Thorson, Reeves, &

Schleuder, 1985). Meadowcroft and Reeves (1989) found that 5- to

8-year-old children who had tested high in the development of

story schema skills showed greater cognitive engagement (i.e.,

slower responses to secondary probes) with central content pre-

sented in a normal story structure than with the same content

presented out of order and thus in the absence of a coherent story

structure.

Two additional studies also compared children’s responses to

normally structured, coherent stories and stories in which scenes

had been edited out of sequence, via existing edit points (Hawkins,

Kim, & Pingree, 1991; Lorch & Castle, 1997). The use of existing

edit points allowed the edited stories to be locally comprehensible

but lacking in a coherent story structure. Both studies used the

same types of Sesame Street stories, and in both studies children

showed high visual attention to normal stories and to edited stories.

Both studies, however, revealed indications that children’s atten-

tion was engaged more systematically by the normally structured

stories. Lorch and Castle (1997), using the secondary task meth-

odology, found that 5-year-old children showed greater cognitive

engagement during the second half of normal stories than during

the first half, but the authors did not observe this difference for the

stories shown in edited form. Hawkins et al. (1991) investigated

the predictability in 3- to 6-year-old children’s visual attention

from one 3-s interval to the next (after removal of variance

resulting from overall attention, age, and tape version). Consistent

with the results of Lorch and Castle (1997), Hawkins et al. (1991)

found much higher stability in attention late in normal stories than

in edited stories. Taken together, the findings of Hawkins et al.

(1991), Lorch and Castle (1997), and Meadowcroft and Reeves

(1989) suggest that children’s attention is responsive to the plot

relevance of story content and becomes increasingly engaged as a

meaningful narrative structure develops.

The major purpose of the current studies is to extend investiga-

tion of school-age children’s online cognitive processing of tele-

vision story content by examining whether children’s cognitive

engagement with a television program increases as sequences of

story content that are central to the plot continue or decreases as

sequences of content that are incidental to the plot continue. In

addition, Experiment 2 investigates whether there are developmen-

tal differences in children’s cognitive engagement as a function of

the continuity of central or incidental content.

Finally, Experiment 3 examines the cognitive engagement of

children with ADHD, whose problems in sustaining attention and

comprehending causal relations have been well documented

(Lorch, Eastham, et al., 2004; Milich, Lorch, & Berthiaume,

2005). Two studies have investigated directly the role of cognitive

engagement in story comprehension among children with ADHD.

Lorch, Eastham, et al. (2004) used a television viewing method-

ology to test the hypothesis that differences in cognitive engage-

ment would account for group differences in recall of causal

relations (i.e., “why” questions) when toys were present during

viewing. The results of three different analytic strategies con-

verged to support the hypothesis that greater cognitive engage-

ment, as indexed by long looks (i.e., longer than 15 s) at the

television, enabled comparison children to form a more complete

representation of the relations among story events, thereby ac-

counting for differences between the comparison and ADHD

groups in understanding causal relations questions. Thus, the find-

ings from Lorch, Eastham, et al. (2004) constitute the first com-

pelling evidence that the amount of time spent in deeper cognitive

processing during long looks helps explain the differential patterns

of recall in children with ADHD and comparison children.

The results of Lorch, Eastham, et al. (2004) suggest that varia-

tions in cognitive engagement may account for the problems that

children with ADHD have with causal relations questions. How-

ever, the degree of cognitive engagement was inferred from time

spent in long looks. The secondary task may offer a more direct

way to assess cognitive engagement. To date, only one study has

used this procedure with an ADHD sample (Whirley, Lorch,

Lemberger, & Milich, 2003). In this study, participants were 22

boys with ADHD and 36 comparison boys, ranging in age from 9

to 11 years. Boys with ADHD responded significantly slower than

the comparison boys, a common finding in reaction time studies.

More important, the patterns of response times (RTs) across the

central sequences differed between the two groups of boys. The

comparison boys showed the predicted pattern of longer RTs (i.e.,

increased cognitive engagement) the longer into a central sequence

the probes appeared. In contrast, the boys with ADHD actually

showed shorter RTs from the beginning to the middle of the central

sequences, which suggests decreased cognitive engagement as the

central sequences progressed. It was only for probes occurring late

in the central sequences that the RTs of the boys with ADHD

1208

LORCH, MILICH, ASTRIN, AND BERTHIAUME

showed the expected increase. In Experiment 3, we use a devel-

opmental perspective to compare the cognitive engagement of

children with ADHD and their comparison peers, using an age

range that included younger children (i.e., 4 to 9 years) than the

previous secondary task studies.

To address whether children’s cognitive engagement is related

to the development of content that varies in plot relevance, pro-

grams were selected that contained strong narrative structures,

with story lines revolving around child characters, and that enabled

the identification of continuous sequences (approximately 15 s or

more) of events that were central or incidental to the plot. Central

sequences are those that are crucial to plot development, whereas

incidental sequences are ones that could be removed without

affecting the coherence of the story. Central and incidental se-

quences of events were operationalized in terms of the combina-

tion of two criteria: whether events in the sequence were part of the

causal chain leading from the beginning to the eventual outcome of

the story (as opposed to “dead end” events), and whether events

were high or low in centrality, as determined by college student

raters (see Experiment 1 Method section for greater detail). For

each central or incidental sequence of events, several positions

were identified as potential times for presentation of secondary

probes. Watching and understanding the television program was

defined as the primary task, and children were told that their

knowledge of story events would be tested after viewing. As a

child watched the program, auditory probes were presented at

preselected times. The child’s secondary task was to press a key as

quickly as possible whenever a probe was presented.

Within the constraints of this task, visual attention was expected

to be very high, so the cycles of viewing decisions described by

Huston and Wright (1983) were not expected to occur. Probe RTs,

however, may capture similar decisions concerning whether to

engage in deeper and more elaborative processing. If children

build a representation during viewing that reflects the causal

structure of a televised story, they should show increasing cogni-

tive engagement as a sequence of central story content continues,

because they will encounter events that can be related to the main

thread of the story. Therefore, the later a probe was presented in a

sequence of central events, the slower children’s responses were

expected to be. In contrast, this pattern was not expected to occur

as a sequence of incidental events continued. The lack of connec-

tions to the causal chain of the story should lead to more superfi-

cial processing. Thus, children’s RTs might be unrelated to probe

position or might even become shorter the later a probe was

presented in a sequence of incidental events.

had ever been referred for any attentional or behavioral difficulties. Children

were paid $5 for their participation, which lasted about 45 min. Data were lost

from 2 participants as a result of equipment malfunction.

Materials

Each participant viewed one episode of the situation comedy Growing

Pains . This program was chosen specifically because its content is suitable

and interesting for children. Furthermore, the plot of this specific episode

(“Dad’s Birthday”) centered on the activities of one of the child characters

in the family. A synopsis of the plot appears in the Appendix, which is

available on the Web. With all commercials removed, the episode is 23 min

in length. A detailed audiovisual script of the program was created as part

of a previous study (Lorch et al., 2000). The script was divided into 407

individual units of meaning, with each unit representing a single idea or event.

In accordance with procedures defined by Trabasso and van den Broek

(1985), a causal network representation of the story was derived. On the

basis of the causal network analysis, each idea unit was coded as to whether

it was on or off the causal chain. The causal chain is a sequence of events

that are causally linked together and carry the story from the beginning to

the end. All story events are either part of the causal chain (i.e., causally

connected to prior and subsequent events) or dead-end events (i.e., not

causally connected to prior and subsequent events on the causal chain).

Each idea unit also had been rated by 58 college students for its

centrality to the story, on a scale from 1 to 7. The students first watched the

program and then were given scripts representing the individual units in the

program. In assigning their ratings, they were instructed to consider how

much plot-relevant information the unit conveyed, how much would be lost

if the unit were removed from the program, and how much the unit

enhanced understanding of the plot. Mean centrality ratings were calcu-

lated across all students for each idea unit.

For the purposes of the present study, an individual unit was considered

to be central if it both was on the causal chain and had a mean centrality

rating of at least 5.15 out of 7, the upper quartile of centrality ratings. An

individual unit was considered to be incidental if it both was off the causal

chain (a dead-end event) and had a mean centrality rating of no more than

3.30, the lower quartile of ratings. Given these classifications, nine con-

tinuous sequences of primarily central events and nine continuous se-

quences of primarily incidental events were identified. A description of

each sequence and its order of appearance in the Growing Pains episode

appears in the Appendix (available on the Web). The length of the se-

quences varied from 15 to 90 s, and sequences contained between 4 and 30

idea units. In central sequences, the mean centrality rating of the units was

5.53, 77% of the individual units were in the upper quartile of the ratings,

and 72.4% of the individual units were on the causal chain. In incidental

sequences, the mean centrality rating of the units was 2.88, 85% of the

individual units were in the lower quartile of the ratings, and none of the

individual units were on the causal chain. In general, individual units in

either type of sequence that did not meet strict criteria for the sequence

tended to be brief and isolated.

To track online variations in children’s cognitive engagement with the

television story, we placed 26 auditory target probes at preselected points

during these sequences of story events. The basic positions for target

probes were approximately 2, 7, or 12 s into the sequence. 1 In addition, in

Experiment 1

Method

Participants

Participants were 27 boys and 33 girls, ages 9–11 years ( M 10.05, SD

0.81). Participants were primarily Caucasian (88.33%), with some African

American children (8.33%) and children of other ethnic identifications

(3.33%). Most parents’ education included at least some college; the average

parent was a college graduate ( M 16.98 years of education). Children were

recruited through advertisements in the newspaper and from an existing pool

of experimental volunteers. For Experiment 1, children were screened for

behavioral problems or attentional difficulties, such as ADHD, in a recruitment

phone call and were not included in the study if the parent indicated the child

1 The nine central and nine incidental sequences exhausted all possible

sequences of story events that met criteria for classification as central or

incidental and continued for a minimum of 15 s. Fifteen seconds was

chosen as the minimum because this is the asymptote of the attentional

inertia function (Anderson & Lorch, 1983). The basic probe positions of 2,

7, and 12 s were chosen to represent early, middle, and later positions

within the 15-s interval. The number of later probes was constrained by the

number of sequences longer than 24 s.

COGNITIVE ENGAGEMENT WITH TELEVISION

1209

sequences lasting 24 s or longer, later probe positions were added to the

basic probes. We created three series of probe assignments to counterbal-

ance probe position across sequences. Each participant was randomly

assigned to one of these three series. Each series contained 3 probes in each

basic position (i.e., 2, 7, and 12 s), at each centrality level, and 4 probes in

the later positions during sequences longer than 24 s, for a total of 13

central and 13 incidental target probes. We inserted 12 filler probes in the

program to prevent participants from detecting a pattern or being able to

predict probes and make anticipatory responses, which resulted in a total of

38 probes during the episode.

A set of comprehension questions was developed for the television

program. The questions tested factual information that was presented in the

program during sequences containing probes. Discrete events that occurred

close in time to a secondary task probe were chosen to be tested, and

straightforward questions were designed to test children’s memory for each

event. An example question testing memory for a central story event (see

Appendix, available on the Web) is “Ben has to return the camera. What

else does he have to do as part of his punishment?” (return money and

apologize to neighbors). Twenty-five cued recall questions were devel-

oped; 14 tested central content, and 11 tested incidental content. Every

sequence was represented by at least 1 question, with two sequences

represented by 2 questions, two represented by 3 questions, and two

represented by 4 questions.

After the child indicated verbally that he or she understood the instructions

and had satisfactorily completed the practice probe program, the experi-

mental session began. The experimenter started the videotape that played

the television show and synchronized the probe program to the tape before

leaving the room.

When the television program was finished, the experimenter reentered

the room and began the cued recall questioning session. The testing session

was videotaped to allow later scoring of cued recall questions. The ques-

tions were asked in the order in which the content was presented in the

show. If the child did not answer a question correctly, the experimenter

supplied the correct answer and then continued to the next question until all

questions were asked. The child was then debriefed, paid, and thanked for

his or her participation.

Results and Discussion

Dependent Measures

The main dependent variable was RT to 26 target probes.

Thirty-eight probes sounded during the program. Thirteen target

probes occurred during sequences of central content, and 13 oc-

curred during sequences of incidental content. The remaining

probes were fillers and were not analyzed. Two participants’ RT

data included one impossibly fast RT (32 ms for 1 child, 112 ms

for the other). These responses were not included in the calculation

of means for the categories. Two participants failed to respond to

1 probe. We obtained category means for these participants by

computing means of the remaining RTs in the category.

Performance on the cued recall questions was scored from

transcripts of the videotape. Each answer was assigned a score of

1 for correct and 0 for incorrect. An independent rater scored 25%

of participants’ cued recall responses, with 92% agreement. The

proportion correct was computed for each participant separately

for central and incidental questions.

Participants’ visual attention to the television was coded from

videotapes. Using a computer program synchronized to the begin-

ning of the television program, we obtained a continuous record of

the child’s looks at and away from the television. This continuous

record of looks allowed for identification of looking status at the

time of every probe as either on or off task. The mean percentage

of visual attention was at ceiling ( M

Procedure

The participants were brought to the on-campus television viewing

facility by a parent. Each child participated individually. Before the ex-

periment began, informed consent was obtained from the parent. After a

brief conversation with the experimenter to help the child feel comfortable

(e.g., talking to the child about school, activities, pets), the child was shown

to his or her seat in the television viewing room. The child was seated at

a table, with a computer keyboard on the table in front of him or her. The

probes were generated by an IBM computer that was located on the floor

next to the child. Responses were made on the keyboard on the table in

front of the child. RTs for each probe were recorded (in milliseconds) from

the beginning of the probe until the child responded by pressing the space

bar. The probe continued until a response was made. If no response was

made, the sound ended after 5 s.

A television was situated on a desk near one corner of the table, with the

television screen about 5 ft (1.5 m) from the child’s seat. A video camera

was mounted on the wall in a position that allowed the image to include

both the child and the television. For the child to look at the television, he

or she needed to make a noticeable head movement. This enabled the

experimenter to record looks toward and away from the television. Each

child was videotaped during the entire experimental session, and visual

attention to the television was later coded from the videotape.

After the child was seated in the room, the experimenter obtained his or

her verbal assent to participate in the study. Once the child agreed to

participate, the experimenter explained the procedure to the child, empha-

sizing that watching the television program was the primary task and

responding to the probe was the secondary task. It was explained to the

participants that they would hear sounds that they should turn off as

quickly as possible by pressing the space bar on a computer keyboard

located on the table in front of them. Participants were instructed to keep

their dominant hand directly in front of the computer keyboard throughout

the entire television program. To help the child do this, the experimenter

placed a loose Velcro strap across the child’s wrist. After the procedure

was explained, the child was given an opportunity to practice. A computer

program presented five probes that were randomly spaced throughout a

2-min period. Each child pressed the space bar in response to every practice

probe. It was again emphasized to the child that watching and understand-

ing the program was the primary task, and each child was told that after the

program ended there would be some questions about the television show.

0.04). RT data

were analyzed after removal of all probe RTs that occurred during

a look away from the television ( n

0.96, SD

51, less than 5% of target

probes). The pattern of results is identical with these RTs included,

but analyses reported in this article exclude RTs to probes that

sounded during looks away from the television (Lorch & Castle,

1997).

RTs

Mean response times were analyzed in a repeated measures

analysis of variance (ANOVA), with centrality (central and inci-

dental) and probe position (2, 7, 12 s into sequence, and later

position) as within-subject variables. Follow-up linear trend anal-

yses tested the a priori prediction that RTs to probes would

increase as the time into a sequence of central content increased. In

addition, we tested whether RTs to probes would decrease as time

into a sequence of incidental content increased. Mean RTs as a

function of centrality and probe position are depicted in Figure 1.

As hypothesized, a significant interaction was observed between

centrality and probe position, F (3, 171) 3.32, p .022. Linear

1210

LORCH, MILICH, ASTRIN, AND BERTHIAUME

850

800

750

700

Cent r al

Incidental

650

600

550

Later

Probe Position (Seconds into Sequence)

Figure 1. Mean probe response times (RTs) as a function of time into central and incidental sequences for

Experiment 1.

trend analyses indicated that RTs to probes occurring during

central sequences increased as time into the sequences increased,

F (1, 57) 4.30, p .05 (effect size r .26), and RTs to probes

occurring during incidental sequences decreased as time into the

sequences increased, F (1, 57) 6.16, p .05 ( r .31).

Follow-up analyses controlling family-wise error rate indicated

that the mean RT in the central, 2-s position was significantly

shorter than the central, later position RT, t (58) 2.36, p .05

( r .30). The incidental, 2-s position RT was significantly slower

than the incidental, later position RT, t (58) 2.29, p .05 ( r

.29). Unexpectedly, children were significantly slower in respond-

ing to probes that sounded during incidental sequences ( M

612.73) than to probes during central sequences ( M 572.15),

F (1, 57) 9.84, p .004 ( r .38). No main effect was observed

for probe position ( F 1, p .05).

cally, one might expect that recall performance would be related to

differing levels of engagement. Each cued recall question tested

information that was presented during or close to a unit that

contained a probe. Mean RTs were computed for probes corre-

sponding to questions that each child answered correctly and

questions answered incorrectly. Regardless of centrality, chil-

dren’s RTs corresponding to questions they answered correctly

tended to be longer ( M 601.77) than their RTs corresponding to

questions they answered incorrectly ( M 587.83), F (1, 48)

3.71, p .06 ( r .27). This suggests an association between

online cognitive engagement with the televised story and later

recall of specific material.

As predicted, 9- to 11-year-old children’s cognitive engagement

was related to the continuity of central or incidental content.

Children’s probe RTs indicated that the longer a sequence of

central story content continued, the more engaged children be-

came, and that as a sequence of incidental content continued, they

became less engaged. Children’s increased engagement was also

related to better performance on story comprehension measures.

Further discussion of the results from all three experiments is

reserved for the general discussion.

Cued Recall Performance

We conducted a t test on cued recall scores to evaluate differ-

ences between performance on central and incidental content.

Performance on the cued recall questions was significantly better

for those questions tapping central content ( M 0.85, SD 0.11)

than for those tapping incidental content ( M 0.61, SD 0.18),

t (57) 12.05, p .001 ( r .84). This result replicates the pattern

observed in numerous previous studies of children’s comprehen-

sion of both televised and written stories (e.g., Lorch, Bellack, &

Augsbach, 1987; van den Broek, 1989; van den Broek et al., 1996).

A further question concerns the possibility of a relation between

cued recall performance and RTs to secondary probes. If children’s

cognitive engagement with the televised story varies systemati-

Experiment 2

Experiment 1 examined cognitive engagement in children ages

9 to 11 years, but an unanswered question is whether younger

school-aged children would also use the causal structure of a

televised story to guide their engagement. Memory for story events

among preschoolers and young school-age children is influenced

by characteristics of the story’s causal structure, but the impact of

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: