<html>  <head> <title>Rose (1986)</title> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage 3.0"> <link rel="stylesheet" href="../res1.css" type="text/css"> </head>  <body>  <p><b><font size="3">Rose, T. L. (1986). Effects of illustrations on reading comprehension of learning disabled students. <i>Journal of Learning Disabilities,</i> 19 (9), 542-544.</font></b></p>  <p><font size="3">Au moyen de textes extraits d&#146;un manuel de lecture, l&#146;auteur tudie l&#146;effet de l&#146;illustration sur la comprhension de texte auprs d&#146;enfants ayant des difficults d&#146;apprentissage.</font></p>  <p><font size="3">Voir aussi <a href="../chap/ch17OR.htm#ro86">Tableau-synthse    1.7</a></font></p>  <hr>  <p><font size="3"><b><u>Variable</u>. </b>2 (mode de prsentation; intragroupe)</font></p>  <hr>  <p><font size="3"><u><b>Sujets</b></u>. Trente-deux enfants (21 garons, 11 filles), dont l&#146;ge varie entre 9 et 13 ans, participent  l&#146;exprience. Les enfants ont des difficults d'apprentissage. Ainsi, d'aprs un sous-test de comprhension en lecture du <i>Peabody Individual Achievement Test</i>, les enfants ont un retard de deux  quatre annes scolaires.</font></p>  <hr>  <p><font size="3"><u><b>Traitement</b></u>. Le matriel exprimental consiste en deux textes de lecture d'une longueur d'environ 70 mots. Les textes sont extraits d'un manuel de lecture (<i>Barnell-Loft Multiple Skills</i>, level A: A2 - A4). </font></p>  <blockquote>   <p><font size="3"><b>Variable 1:</b> <b>Mode de prsentation</b> des textes<br>   <b>1.1</b> Texte seul.<br>   <b>1.2</b> Texte accompagn d'illustrations. </font></p> </blockquote>  <p><font size="3">L&#146;exprience se droule individuellement. L&#146;exprience est prcde d&#146;une activit de familiarisation (lecture d&#146;un autre texte et questions). Chaque enfant lit un texte illustr et un texte non illustr, l'ordre de prsentation des textes et de la version tant contrebalanc.</font></p>  <p><font size="3"><b>Mesure</b>. Test de huit questions sur le texte (ide principale, dtails, infrences), dont plusieurs sont extraites du manuel de lecture.</font></p>  <hr>  <p><font size="3"><u><b>Rsultats</b></u>. Les enfants russissent significativement mieux sans illustrations.<br> </font></p> <div align="center"><center>  <table BORDER="1" CELLSPACING="2" CELLPADDING="5" WIDTH="294">   <tr>     <td WIDTH="100%" VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="16" colspan="2"><b><font size="3">Questions (max. 8)</font></b></td>   </tr>   <tr>     <td WIDTH="69%" VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="16"><font size="3">Var 1.1: Texte seul</font></td>     <td WIDTH="31%" VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="16"><b><p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3">6,84</font></b></td>   </tr>   <tr>     <td WIDTH="69%" VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="16"><font size="3">Var 1.2: Texte et illustrations</font></td>     <td WIDTH="31%" VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="16"><b><p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3">6,06</font></b></td>   </tr> </table> </center></div>  <hr>  <p><font size="3"><b><u>Discussion</u>.</b> &quot;&nbsp;Several theoretical explanations for the current findings have been presented previously. These explanations hypothesize that illustrations distract the reader&#146;s attention from the critical characteristics of the printed stimulus, so the reader may attend more to the irrelevant stimuli (i.e., the illustration) than to the relevant stimuli (i.e., the printed text) (Samuels, 1967; 1970). Further, a primary characteristic ascribed to learning disabled students is the inability to filter out extraneous stimuli (i.e., distractibility) [...]. While the present study was designed to investigate the effects of illustrations on comprehension, rather than the validity of any theoretical explanation, the findings of the current study do not appear to contradict either of these theoretical explanations&nbsp;&quot; (p. 543).</font></p>  <hr>  <p><font size="3"><b><u>Rfrences bibliographiques</u>.</b> Total de 22 rfrences dont:</font></p>  <p><font size="3">Samuels, S. J. (1967). Attentional process in reading: The effects of pictures on the acquisition of reading response. <i>Journal of Educational Psychology,</i> 58, 337-342.</font></p>  <p><font size="3">Samuels, S. J. (1970). Effects of pictures on learning to read, comprehension, and attitudes. <i>Review of Educational Research,</i> 40, 397-407.</font></p> </body> </html> 
