Effects of Audience Awareness on Procedural Text Writing
Abstract
Effects of audience awareness were examined. Some participants acted as writers and the others acted as readers. Writers wrote a text describing a geometrical figure. Readers read the text and tried to draw the figure according to the description. In Exp. 1, audience awareness was manipulated among undergraduate students, 11 men and 34 women. Writers in the high audience-awareness condition spent more time planning and writing texts than writers in the low audience-awareness condition. Texts in the high audience-awareness condition consisted of more letters and sentences with descriptions elaborating the texts. In Exp. 2, prototype texts were constructed based on the results of Exp. 1. Undergraduate students, 11 men and 47 women, who read the prototype text in the high audience-awareness condition could draw the figure more accurately. In Exp. 3, effects of feedback from readers were examined. Ninth-grade students, 22 boys and 34 girls, participated as writers and 7th-grade students, 22 boys and 34 girls, participated as readers. Merely being told to attend to an audience did not improve the quality of texts written by 9th-grade students. However, feedback from the readers who were 7th-grade students was effective. Writers could revise the texts appropriately according to feedback and improve the quality of texts. In addition, the experience of revising the text according to feedback transferred to later writing. Educational implications of the results are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
Allen G., Thompson A. (1995) Analysis of the effect of networking on computer-assisted collaborative writing in a fifth grade classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12, 65–75.
Beal C. R. (1996) The role of comprehension monitoring in children's revision. Educational Psychology Review, 8, 219–238.
Bereiter C., Scardamalia M. (1987) The psychology of written communication. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Berkenkotter C. (1981) Understanding a writer's awareness of audience. College Composition and Communication, 32, 388–399.
Black K. (1989) Audience analysis and persuasive writing at the college level. Research in the Teaching of English, 23, 231–258.
Bovair S., Kieras D. E. (1991) Toward a model of acquiring procedures from text. In Barr R., Kamil M. L., Mosenthal P. B., Pearson P. D. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research. Vol. 2. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Pp. 206–229.
Bridwell L. S. (1980) Revising strategies in twelfth grade students' transactional writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 14, 197–222.
Chanquoy L. (2001) How to make it easier for children to revise their writing: a study of text revision from 3rd to 5th grades. British Journal of Educational Psychology; 71, 15–41.
Crowhurst M. (1995) The developmental stylistics of young writers' communicative intentions. In Rubin D. L. (Ed.), Composing social identity in written language. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Pp. 189–202.
Crowhurst M., Piche G. E. (1979) Audience and mode of discourse effects on syntactic complexity in writing at two grade levels. Research in the Teaching of English, 13, 101–109.
De Jong M. D. T., Lentz L. R. (1996) Expert judgments versus reader feedback: a comparison of text evaluation techniques. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 26, 507–519.
De Temple J. M., Wu H-F., Snow C. E. (1991) Pappa pig just left for pigtown: children's oral and written picture descriptions under varying instructions. Discourse Processes, 14, 469–495.
Dixon P. (1987) The processing of organizational and component step information in written language. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 24–35.
Dixon P., Faries J., Gabrys G. (1988) The role of explicit action statements in understanding and using written directions. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 649–667.
Flower L. (1979) Writer-based prose: a cognitive basis for problems in writing. College English, 41, 19–37.
Flower L., Hayes J. R. (1980) The cognition of discovery: defining a rhetorical problem. College Composition and Communication, 31, 21–32.
Flower L., Hayes J. R. (1981) A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365–387.
Flower L., Hayes J. R., Carey L., Schriver K., Stratman J. (1986) Detection, diagnosis, and the strategies of revision. College Composition and Communication, 37, 16–55.
Frank L. A. (1992) Writing to be read: young writers' ability to demonstrate audience awareness when evaluated by their readers. Research in the Teaching of English, 26, 277–298.
Gallini J. K., Helman N. (1995) Audience awareness in technology-mediated environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 13, 245–261.
Hayes J. N., Brandt K. M., Chantry K. H. (1988) The impact of friendly and hostile audiences on the argumentative writing of high school and college students. Research in the Teaching of English, 22, 391–416.
Hayes J. R. (1996) A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In Levy C. M., Ransdell S. (Eds.), The science of writing: theories, methods, individual differences, and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Pp. 1–27.
Hayes J. R., Young R. E., Matchett M. L., McCaffrey M., Cochran C., Hajduk T. (1992) Reading empirical research studies: the rhetoric of research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hiruma F. (1993) Function of utterance in explaining action-sequences. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 41, 49–56.
Kroll B. M. (1978) Cognition egocentrism and the problem of audience awareness in written discourse. Research in the Teaching of English, 12, 269–281.
Mills C. B., Diehl V. A., Birkmire D. P., Mou L-C. (1993) Procedural text: predictions of importance ratings and recall by models of reading comprehension. Discourse Processes, 16, 279–315.
Rafoth B. A. (1985) Audience adaptation in the essays of proficient and nonproficient freshman writers. Research in the Teaching of English, 19, 237–253.
Rafoth B. A. (1989) Audience and information. Research in the Teaching of English, 23, 273–290.
Ransdell S. E., Levy C. M. (1994) Writing as process and product: the impact of tool, genre, audience knowledge, and writer expertise. Computers in Human Behavior, 10, 511–527.
Redd-Boyd T. M., Slater W. H. (1989) The effects of audience specification on undergraduates' attitudes, strategies, and writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 23, 77–108.
Roen D. H., Willey R. J. (1988) The effects of audience awareness on drafting and revising. Research in the Teaching of English, 22, 75–88.
Rubin D. L. (1984) Social cognition and written communication. Written Communication, 1, 211–245.
Rubin D. L., O'Looney J. (1990) Facilitation of audience awareness: revision processes of basic writers. In Kirsh G., Roen D. H. (Eds.), A sense of audience in written communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Pp. 280–292.
Rubin D. L., Piche G. L. (1979) Development in syntactic and strategic aspects of audience adaptation skills in written persuasive communication. Research in the Teaching of English, 13, 293–316.
Rubin D. L., Rafoth B. A. (1986) Social cognitive ability as a predictor of the quality of expository and persuasive writing among college freshmen. Research in the Teaching of English, 20, 9–21.
Schriver K. A. (1992) Teaching writers to anticipate readers' needs. Written Communication, 9, 179–208.
Smith E. E., Goodman L. (1984) Understanding written instructions: the role of an explanatory schema. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 359–396.
Sommers N. (1980) Revision strategies of student writers and experienced adult writers. College Composition and Communication, 31, 378–388.
Swaney J. H., Janik C. J., Bond S. J., Hayes J. R. (1991) Editing for comprehension: improving the process through reading protocols. In Steinberg E. R. (Ed.), Plain language. Detroit, MI: Wayne State Univer. Press. Pp. 173–203.
Torrance M., Thomas G. V., Robinson E. J. (1993) Training in thesis writing: an evaluation of three conceptual orientations. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 170–184.
Traxler M. J., Gernsbacher M. A. (1992) Improving written communication through minimal feedback. Language and Cognitive Processes, 7, 1–22.
Traxler M. J., Gernsbacher M. A. (1993) Improving written communication through perspective-taking. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 311–334.
Wallace D. L., Hayes J. R., Hatch J. A., Miller W., Moser G., Silk C. M. (1996) Better revision in eight minutes? Prompting first-year college writers to revise globally. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 682–688.
Zimmerman B. J., Kitsantas A. (1999) Acquiring writing revision skill: shifting from process to outcome self-regulatory goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 241–250.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published: August 2006
Issue published: August 2006
PubMed: 17037450
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Article usage*
Total views and downloads: 202
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 9 view articles Opens in new tab
Crossref: 7
- It's not just a phase: Investigating text simplification in a second l...
- Recentering Purpose and Audience as Part of a Critical, Humanizing App...
- Lessons Learned from a Writing to Learn Program for Public Health Stud...
- Effects of the Explanatory Situation on Explainers’ Understanding:
- Writing from sources: Does audience matter?
- State Writing Assessment: Inclusion of Motivational Factors in Writing...
- What makes a skilled writer? Working memory and audience awareness dur...
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Get access
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
loading institutional access options
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
