The structure of writing processes as revealed by secondary task demands.

dc.creator	Ransdell, S.
dc.creator	Levy, C. M.
dc.creator	Kellogg, R.T.
dc.date	2002-01-01T00:00:00Z
dc.date.accessioned	2015-07-20T22:22:25Z
dc.date.available	2015-07-20T22:22:25Z
dc.identifier	1567-6617
dc.identifier	1573-1731
dc.identifier	https://doaj.org/article/b81bf9a81a17486b8e234756143befbf
dc.identifier.uri	http://evidence.thinkportal.org/handle/123456789/20662
dc.description	This study investigates how working memory capacity may account for why better writers are able to coordinate mutliple subprocesses more easily than poor writers. Writing, while distracted by secondary task demands, offers one way to explore the importance of working memory to the structure inherent in the writing subprocesses. For the study, the author chose experiments based on the finding that good writers manage the simultaneous demands of writing subprocesses better than poor writers (Levy & Ransdell, 1995, pp. 767–779). Students composed essays while distracted by concurrent loads on working memory. The author found that when relatively minor demands were made on working memory, i.e., unattended and attended background speech, these variables caused a decrease in fluency, but had no effect on quality. Attended, but not unattended, speech reliably reduced average sentence length. A concurrent task of remembering six digits reduced fluency by nearly 50% also reliably decreased quality and sentence length. Resources which are relatively stable in the face of dual-task demands were allocated for the regulation of writing quality, sentence length, pause duration and location. The author found that better writers write longer sentences, pause for shorter durations and at clause boundaries more often than poorer writers. Competing tasks first disrupt the timing of writing and only impact quality when larger secondary task demands in working memory are required.
dc.language	English
dc.publisher	Springer
dc.relation	http://l1.publication-archive.com/next?cont=4ZMAGGSpLuI=
dc.relation	https://doaj.org/toc/1567-6617
dc.relation	https://doaj.org/toc/1573-1731
dc.rights	CC BY-NC-ND
dc.source	L1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature, Vol 2, Iss 2, Pp 141-163 (2002)
dc.subject	composition
dc.subject	fluency
dc.subject	writing
dc.subject	writing quality
dc.subject	writing tasks
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	DOAJ:Linguistics
dc.subject	DOAJ:Languages and Literatures
dc.subject	Theory and practice of education
dc.subject	LB5-3640
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	DOAJ:Education
dc.subject	DOAJ:Social Sciences
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	DOAJ:Linguistics
dc.subject	DOAJ:Languages and Literatures
dc.subject	Theory and practice of education
dc.subject	LB5-3640
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	DOAJ:Education
dc.subject	DOAJ:Social Sciences
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	Theory and practice of education
dc.subject	LB5-3640
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	Theory and practice of education
dc.subject	LB5-3640
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	Theory and practice of education
dc.subject	LB5-3640
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.title	The structure of writing processes as revealed by secondary task demands.
dc.type	article