Cogprints

Suppressing visual feedback in written composition: Effects on processing demands and coordination of the writing processes

Olive, Thierry and Piolat, Annie (2002) Suppressing visual feedback in written composition: Effects on processing demands and coordination of the writing processes. [Journal (Paginated)]

Full text available as:

[img]
Preview
PDF
213Kb

Abstract

The goal of this experiment was to investigate the role of visual feedback during written composition. Effects of suppression of visual feedback were analysed both on processing demands and on on-line coordination of low-level execution processes and of high-level conceptual and linguistic processes. Writers composed a text and copied it either with or without visual feedback. Processing demands of the writing processes were evaluated with reaction times to secondary auditory probes that were analysed according to whether participants were handwriting (in a composing and a copying tasks) or engaged in high level processes (when pausing in a composing task). Suppression of visual feedback increased reaction times interference (secondary reaction time minus baseline reaction time) during handwriting in the copying task and not during pauses in the composing task. This suggests that suppression of visual feedback affected processing demands of only execution processes and not those of high-level conceptual and linguistic processes. This is confirmed by analysis of quality of the texts produced by participants that were little, if any, affected by the suppression of visual feedback. Results also indicate that the increase in processing demands of execution related to suppression of visual feedback affected on-line coordination of the writing processes. Indeed, when visual feedback was suppressed, reaction time interferences associated to handwriting were not reliable different in the copying task and in the composing task but were significantly different in the composition task, RT interference associated to handwriting being lower in the copying task than in the composition task. When visual feedback was suppressed, writers activated step-by-step execution processes and high-level writing processes, whereas they concurrently activated these writing processes when composing with visual feedback.

Item Type:Journal (Paginated)
Keywords:writing, visual feedback, handwriting, text composition, processing demands, coordination of high- and low-level writing processes
Subjects:Psychology > Psycholinguistics
Psychology > Cognitive Psychology
Psychology > Perceptual Cognitive Psychology
ID Code:3247
Deposited By:Olive, Thierry
Deposited On:24 Oct 2003
Last Modified:11 Mar 2011 08:55

References in Article

Select the SEEK icon to attempt to find the referenced article. If it does not appear to be in cogprints you will be forwarded to the paracite service. Poorly formated references will probably not work.

Atwell, M. (1981). The evolution of text: the interrelation of reading and writing in the composing process. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Indiana.

Bourdin, B., & Fayol, M. (1994). Is written language production more difficult than oral language production? A working memory approach. International Journal of Psychology, 29, 591-620.

Brown, J. S., MCDonald, J. L., Brown, T. L., & Carr, T. H. (1988). Adapting to processing demands in discourse production: The case of handwriting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 45-59.

Chafe, W.L. (1982). Integration and involvement in speaking, writing and oral literature. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Spoken and Written language: exploring orality and literacy, Vol. 9, Advances in discourse comprehension (pp. 35-53). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Coirier, P., & Andriessen, J. (Eds.) (2000). Foundations of argumentative text processing. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University press.

Dansac, C., & Passerault, J.-M. (1996, October). Effects of re-reading suppression on the temporal parameters in text production. Graphic presentation at the 1996 European Writing Conference, Barcelona, Spain.

Ellis, A. W. (1988). Normal writing processes and peripheral acquired dysgraphias, Language and Cognitive Processes, 3(2), 99-127.

Ellis, A.W., Young, A.W., & Flude, B.M. (1987). "Afferent" dysgraphia in a patient and in normal subjects. Language and Cognitive Processes, 3(2), 99-127.

Fayol, M. (1999). Writing: From on-line management problems to strategies. In M. Torrance & G. Jeffery (Eds.), Cognitive demands of writing. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

Flamen, J.-P., & Piolat, A. (1999). On visual feedback in writing by 10-12 year-olds: an on-line approach. In M.-F. Crété & E. Espéret (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1998 Writing Conference (pp. 383-384). Poitiers: MSHS, University of Poitiers.

Galbraith, D., & Sumpner, C.(1996, October). Effects of reduced visual feedback on writing. Graphic presentation at the 1996 European Writing Conference, Barcelona, Spain.

Graham, S., & Weintraub, N. (1996). A review of handwriting research: Progress and prospects from 1980 to 1994. Educational Psychology Review, 8(1), 7-87.

Gould, J.D. (1980). Experiments on composing letters: some facts, some myths, and some observations. In L.W. Gregg & E.R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 98-127). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Grabowski, J. (1999). Verbal modes of knowledge diagnosis : the writing superiority effect. In M.-F. Crété & E. Espéret (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1998 Writing Conference (pp. 11-16). Poitiers: MSHS, University of Poitiers.

Hayes, J. R. & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.). Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Hull, G. A., & Smith, W. L. (1983). Interrupting visual feedback in writing. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 57, 963-978

Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kellogg, R. T. (1987). Effects of topic knowledge on the allocation of processing time and cognitive effort to writing processes. Memory & Cognition, 15, 256-266.

Kellogg, R. T. (1994). The psychology of writing. New York: Oxford University Press.

Kellogg, R. T. (1996). A model of working memory in writing In C. M. Levy & S. E. Ransdell (Eds.). The Science Of Writing: Theories, Methods, Individual differences and applications (pp. 57-71). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Kellogg, R.T. (1999). Components of working memory in writing. In M. Torrance & G.C. Jeffery (Eds.), The cognitive demands of writing (pp. 25-42). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

Kellogg, R. T. (2001). Competition for working memory among writing processes. American Journal of Psychology, 114, 2, 175-192.

Kerr, B. (1973). Processing demands during mental operations. Memory & Cognition, 1(4), 401-412.

Levy, C. M. & Ransdell, S. E. (1995). Is writing as difficult as it seems ? Memory & Cognition, 23(6), 767-779.

Levy, C. M. & Ransdell, S. E. (1996). Writing signatures. In C. M. Levy & S. E. Ransdell (Eds.). The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 149-161). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

McCutchen, D. (1996). A capacity theory of writing: working memory in composition. Educational Psychology Review, 8(3), 299-325.

McCutchen, D. (1988). Functional automaticity in children's writing: A problem of metacognitive control. Written Communication, 5, 306-324.

Olive, T. (1999). Economie de la production de textes : Gestion des ressources attentionnelles et mode d'activation des processus rédactionnels [Economy of text composition: Management of cognitive resources and activation of the writing processes]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Provence.

Olive, T., & Kellogg, R.T. (in press). Concurrent activation of high- and low level production processes in written composition. Memory & Cognition.

Olive, T., Kellogg R. T. & Piolat, A. (2001). The triple-task technique for studying the process of writing. In T. Olive & C. M. Levy (Eds), Contemporary tools and techniques for studying writing (pp. 31-58). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Olive, T., Piolat, A., & Roussey J.-Y. (1997). Effort cognitif et mobilisation des processus en production de textes : effet de l’habileté rédactionnelle et du niveau de connaissances [Cognitive effort and time processing of the writing processes: writing skill and level of knowledge]. In D. Mellier & A. Vam Hoffe (Eds.), Attention et contrôle cognitif : Mécanismes, développement des habiletés, pathologies (pp. 71-85). Rouen: Publications de l’Université de Rouen.

Piolat, A. (1982). L'écrit et l'oral comme systèmes de production verbale [Writing and speaking as systems of verbal production]. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Provence, France.

Piolat, A. & Olive, T. (2000). Comment étudier le coût et le déroulement de la rédaction de textes ? La méthode de triple-tâche : un bilan méthodologique [How to study the cost and unfolding of text composition? The triple task method]. L’Année Psychologique, 100, 465-502.

Piolat, A., Olive, T., Roussey, J.-Y., Thunin, O., & Ziegler, J. C. (1999). Scriptkell: A computer assisted tool for measuring the relative distribution of time and cognitive effort in writing and other tasks. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31(1), 113-121.

Piolat, A., Roussey, J.-Y., Olive, T., & Farioli, F. (1996). Charge mentale et mobilisation des processus rédactionnels : examen de la procédure de Kellogg [Cognitive load and activation of the writing processes: Assessing Kellogg’s method]. Psychologie Française, 41(4), 339-354.

Smyth, M.M., & Silvers, G. (1987). Functions of vision in the control of handwriting. Acta Psychologica, 65, 47-64.

Teleman, U. (1981). On visual feedback in writing. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference of Applied Linguistics (pp. 424-425). Lund.

Van Doorn, R.R.A., & Keuss, P.J.G. (1992). The role of vision in the temporal and spatial control of handwriting. Acta Psychologica, 81, 269-286.

Van Doorn, R.R.A., & Keuss, P.J.G. (1993). Does the production of letter strokes in handwriting benefits from vision? Acta Psychologica, 82, 275-290.

Van Galen, G.P. (1991). Handwriting: Issues for a psychomotor theory. Human Movement Science, 10, 165-191.

Van Galen, G.P., Smyth, M.M., Meulenbroek, R.G.J., & Hylkema, H. (1989). The role of short-term memory and the motor buffer in handwriting under visual and non-visual guidance. In R. Plamondon, C.Y. Suen, & M.L. Simner (Eds.), Computer recognition and human production of handwriting (pp. 253-271). Singapore: World Scientific.

Zesiger, P. (1995). Ecrire. Approches cognitive, neuropsychologique et développementale [Writing: cognitive, neuropsychological and developmental approaches]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Metadata

Repository Staff Only: item control page