语音及语音信念对元理解监测准确性的影响

发布时间：2018-05-02 22:35

本文选题：语音 + 语音信念　；参考：《浙江师范大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：阅读对人类来说有着非常重要的意义,对学生来说尤其如此。阅读质量的高低不仅要从认知的角度来看,也要从元认知的角度考虑。根据自我调节学习理论,有效的阅读,不仅要求读者能正确的理解文章的内容,而且要求读者能够正确的判断自己对文章的理解程度。只有准确的判断自己的理解程度,才能有针对性地调整自己的学习进度,从而更有效的学习。在现今的学校教育中,传统的教学方法正逐步被新兴的教学方法取代。多媒体日益进入课堂教学活动中。在课堂上语音、动画、图片与传统的文字材料发生着越来越密切的联系。在这种趋势下,阅读也不再是单纯的文字活动,而是有了语音、图片等新元素的加入。因此,有关阅读理解的研究也必须要考虑这些新因素的加入对阅读的影响。元理解的研究经过二三十年的发展已经日趋深入。在元理解理论指导之下,研究者对影响元理解监测准确性因素的研究逐渐从客观因素转向主观因素。近年来,元理解领域对信念、期待等因素的讨论越来越多,但研究的结果却不太一致。因此继续研究下去是很有必要的。基于以上考虑,本研究试图探究语音以及语音信念对元理解监测准确性的是否有影响以及有何种影响。这里的语音信念是指读者是否相信语音有促进阅读理解的作用。本研究包括两个实验,实验一采用2(有语音和无语音)×2(相信和不相信)完全随机设计,旨在考查两种因素对阅读理解成绩及元理解监测准确性的影响。实验二为单因素被试间设计,自变量为语音类型,分为无语音、普通话语音和法语语音三个水平,旨在考查在没有信念激活的情况下,语音对读者阅读理解和元理解监测准确性是否有影响。通过研究,得到以下结果： (1)语音对阅读理解成绩无显著影响； (2)在无信念激活的情况下,语音对元理解监测准确性有消极影响； (3)不管实际上有无语音,只要读者相信语音有促进作用,就会提高其阅读理解测验的回忆成绩； (4)相信语音的作用对元理解监测准确性有消极影响,不相信语音作用的读者,其元理解监测准确性显著高于相信的读者。以上结果说明,相比充满人声的环境而言,安静的学习环境更加有利于阅读理解。而对待信念要分情况看。如果处在一个充满人声的环境里,那么相信语音的作用似乎是个不错的选择；如果处在一个安静的环境里,虽然不相信语音的作用会导致阅读成绩的下降,但却会提升元理解监测准确性。从自我调节学习的角度来看,不相信似乎比相信更好。当然,一个人的信念如果不是那么好转变的话,反过来看,根据自己的信念选择合适的阅读环境就变得很重要了。
[Abstract]:Reading is very important for human beings, especially for students. Reading quality should be considered not only from the perspective of cognition, but also from the perspective of metacognition. According to the self-regulated learning theory, effective reading not only requires the reader to understand the content of the article correctly, but also requires the reader to judge the understanding degree of the article correctly. Only by accurately judging their understanding, can we adjust their learning progress and learn more effectively. In the present school education, the traditional teaching method is gradually replaced by the new teaching method. Multimedia is increasingly entering classroom teaching activities. In class, speech, animation, pictures and traditional text materials are more and more closely related. In this trend, reading is no longer a simple text activity, but with the addition of new elements such as voice, pictures and so on. Therefore, the study of reading comprehension must also consider the influence of these new factors on reading. The study of metacognition has gone deeper and deeper after 20 or 30 years of development. Under the guidance of meta-understanding theory, the research on the factors influencing the accuracy of meta-understanding monitoring has gradually shifted from objective factors to subjective factors. In recent years, there have been more and more discussions on factors such as belief and expectation in the field of metacognition, but the results are not consistent. Therefore, it is necessary to continue to study. Based on the above considerations, this study attempts to explore whether and how phonological beliefs affect the accuracy of meta-understanding monitoring. This phonological belief refers to whether the reader believes that pronunciation plays an important role in reading comprehension. The present study consists of two experiments. Experiment 1 was designed with 2 (phonetic and non-phonetic) 脳 2 (believe and disbelief) random design to examine the effects of two factors on reading comprehension scores and metacognition monitoring accuracy. Experiment 2 was designed for single factor subjects. The independent variable was phonetic type, which was divided into three levels: no speech, Putonghua pronunciation and French pronunciation. The purpose of the experiment was to examine the situation without the activation of belief. Pronunciation has an effect on readers' reading comprehension and metacognition monitoring accuracy. The results of the study are as follows: 1) Phonetics has no significant effect on reading comprehension; 2) without the activation of belief, pronunciation has a negative effect on the accuracy of metacognition monitoring; (3) whether or not the reader actually has pronunciation, as long as the reader believes that pronunciation has a positive effect, the recall score of the reading comprehension test will be improved; (4) it is believed that the effect of pronunciation has a negative effect on the accuracy of meta comprehension monitoring, and that for readers who do not believe in phonological effects, the accuracy of metacognition monitoring is significantly higher than that of readers who believe in it. These results suggest that a quiet learning environment is more conducive to reading comprehension than a voice-filled environment. But to treat faith should be divided into circumstances. If you are in a human-filled environment, it seems like a good choice to believe in the role of speech; if you are in a quiet environment, though you don't believe that the role of speech can lead to a decline in reading performance, But it will improve the accuracy of meta-understanding monitoring. From the perspective of self-regulated learning, it seems better not to believe than to believe. Of course, it is important to choose the right reading environment based on one's beliefs, if not so well changed.
【学位授予单位】：浙江师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：B842

【参考文献】