Aspects of Comprehension 583role of domain knowledge in comprehension is a key aspect
of predicting the success of text comprehension for an indi-
vidual reading a certain text.
Domain Knowledge
Clearly, domain knowledge is a very powerful variable that
affects situation model development and, thus, learning
from text. Because development of a situation model re-
quires adequate prior knowledge, it is logical to assume
that level of domain knowledge is important in determining
the extent to which individuals will learn from a text.
Empirical evidence in the experimental literature supports
the idea that domain knowledge is exceedingly important
in predicting comprehension (Recht & Leslie, 1988;
Schneider, Körkel, & Weinert, 1989; C. H. Walker, 1987;
Wolfe et al., 1998). The results overwhelmingly demon-
strate that high domain knowledge improves comprehension
performance, even when experiments control for factors
such as IQ (W. Kintsch, 1998). To some extent, high do-
main knowledge can also compensate for poor reading skill.
Of course, domain knowledge cannot compensate for com-
plete lack of reading skill or deficient decoding skills. How-
ever, for individuals who have basic but low-level reading
skills, high levels of domain knowledge can cancel out such
disadvantages under the right circumstances (e.g., given a
text that utilizes the domain of expertise). For example,
Adams, Bell, and Perfetti (1995) demonstrated that domain
knowledge and reading skill can trade off in order to equate
reading comprehension.
Domain knowledge has been shown to impact compre-
hension at a deeper level than that of factors external to the
individual. Moravcsik and Kintsch (1993) investigated the
interactive effects of domain knowledge, text quality (good
vs. poor writing and organization), and participants’ reading
ability in comprehension. Results demonstrated that without
appropriate domain knowledge, readers could not form ap-
propriate inferences about the text. Although high- and low-
knowledge readers generated about the same global number
of inferences, most of the those created by low-knowledge
readers were erroneous. In contrast, high-quality texts (with
good, organized writing) facilitated recall of a text but not
formation of a situation model. Thus, although good writing
can help readers, it does not compensate for lack of adequate
domain knowledge when learning is the goal.
Text Factors
Although text factors cannot overcome factors internal to the
individual (adequate and appropriate domain knowledge),
they can influence a reader’s comprehension. In order to
create a situation model from text, readers must form a co-
herent textbase that can be integrated with prior knowledge.
For low-knowledge readers, texts with a clear macrostructure
(e.g., texts with embedded headings or clear topic sentences)
facilitate both memory for and learning from text. Empirical
evidence supports this claim. Brooks, Dansereau, Spurlin,
and Holley (1983) compared the comprehension perfor-
mance of individuals after reading a text containing embed-
ded headings versus a text without these embedded headings.
A comprehension test administered immediately after read-
ing showed only small benefits for the text with headings, but
a test 2 days later revealed significant benefits for readers
exposed to the embellished text. In a second experiment,
however, Brooks et al. found that headings were not well
used by students unless accompanied by instructions on
using the headings as processing aids. Thus, the extent to
which students spontaneously attend to and make use of text
headings may predict the headings’ effectiveness.
Other manipulations of text components also have been
successful in promoting reader comprehension. Britton and
Gulgoz (1991) improved comprehension of texts unfamiliar
to students by identifying and repairing coherence gaps in a
text (according to the method proposed by J. R. Miller &
Kintsch, 1980). The effect of this manipulation is ex-
plicit presentation of text structure achieved by connecting
information that normally requires bridging inferences
(W. Kintsch, 1998). Thus, removing coherence gaps and
making the text more fully explicit has the effect of reducing
the number of inferences the reader must make, thereby
facilitating comprehension. Other research has supported
the conclusion that making text macrostructure clear has
comprehension benefits (Beck, McKeown, Sinatra, &
Loxterman, 1991; Lorch & Lorch, 1995; Lorch et al., 1993;
McNamara et al., 1996). As discussed earlier, clear presenta-
tion of text macrostructure facilitates the recall of text infor-
mation and the organization of text representations.
However, some evidence suggests that when readers
have ample domain knowledge, texts that do not require in-
ferencing or active processing are not ideal for facilitating
comprehension (W. Kintsch, 1998; McNamara et al., 1996).
Surprisingly, high-knowledge readers actually can learn
more (as indicated by situation model measures) from text
with relatively low coherence (McNamara & Kintsch, 1996;
McNamara et al., 1996). The interpretation of this effect is
that high-knowledge readers must work harder to make sense
out of a low coherence text; this text-relevant processing re-
sults in formation of a better-developed situation model,
whereas recall is not influenced. Other methods that encour-
age active text processing have similar benefits; these include
frequent self-explanations or use of advance outlines that do
not match the structure of the text (W. Kintsch, 1998).