Experimental testing demonstrates distinct memory representations for surface forms, textbases, and situation models in readers, indicating a multi-tiered architecture for discourse comprehension.
It has recently been argued that memory for a text or discourse consists of three separate representations: a surface representation, a propositional textbase, and a situation model. This tri‐partite division is supported by a recognition memory procedure that demonstrates that (a) subjects can reliably differentiate between sentences actually read and meaning preserving paraphrases of those sentences, (b) performance improves when the distractors also differ at the propositional level but are consistent with the situation described by the text, (c) recognition is best when the distractors are inconsistent with all three levels of representation. These data are subject to alternative interpretations because all changes within a level of representation may not be equal and inferences based on one level of representation may be responsible for differences attributed to another. A series of control experiments eliminates these alternatives.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fletcher et al. (1990) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: