Psycholinguistic and Cognitive Influences on Textual Entailment Misunderstandings in Senior High School
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.62007/joumi.v2i3.354Keywords:
psycholinguistic, cognitive, textual entailmentAbstract
The objective of this study is to find out reasons behind common misinterpretation of textual entailment among students in educational settings, focusing particularly on how basic textual concepts impact students' ability to comprehend and analyze texts accurately. The study was carried out at SMA Alam Lampung using twelfth-grade students as participants. It used a qualitative research design and employed saturation sampling procedures to choose its sample. This study aims to explore students' understanding and interpretation skills regarding textual entailment by using questionnaires and interviews as the main data gathering techniques. The results show a significant difference in students' ability to correctly grasp texts and hypotheses, indicating a common misinterpretation of textual entailment principles. Out of 60 replies gathered from 10 questions answered by 6 students each, only 4 solutions adhered to the rules of textual entailment. The other 56 responses showed a misunderstanding of the connection between Text and Hypotheses. The research explores the psycholinguistic and cognitive processes that lead to misconceptions, highlighting the importance of lexical access and comprehending complicated sentence patterns in making valid inferences from texts. It also recognizes the significance of prior knowledge in aiding text understanding and analysis. These results imply that successful educational approaches should go beyond just improving linguistic abilities. They should use tactics designed to help pupils overcome psycholinguistic and cognitive obstacles, so improving their interpretive skills. This study suggests a thorough educational method that combines language skills enhancement with specific tactics to address the psycholinguistic and cognitive barriers affecting students' understanding and interpretation of texts.
References
Abdiansah, A., Azhari, A., & Kartika Sari, A. (2018). INARTE: An Indonesian Dataset for Recognition Textual Entailment. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSTC.2018.8528283
Akyol, H., & Boyaci-Altinay, Y. (2019). Reading difficulty and its remediation: A case study. In European Journal of Educational Research (Vol. 8, Issue 4, pp. 1269–1286). Eurasian Society of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.4.1269
Anggia, H., Dharmawan, Y. Y., Cucus, A., & Deviyanti, R. (2023). Student’s reading self-efficacy regression model and differences in online extensive reading program. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2621(1). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0142284
Bagus Wicaksono, A., Suwandi, S., & Tiyasmala, M. (2021). Implications of Metacognitive Knowledge in Indonesian Learning Teaching Materials for Foreign Speakers. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210514.008
Bayat, N., & Çetinkaya, G. (2020). The relationship between inference skills and reading comprehension. Egitim ve Bilim, 45(203), 177–190. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2020.8782
Brown, C. (2007). Cognitive psychology. In The Social Science Encyclopedia. https://doi.org/10.5840/thought1940152181
Cowan, N. (2009). What are the differences between long-term, short-term, and working memory? Nelson. NIH Public Access, 6123(07), 323–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6123(07)00020-9.What
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design. In NBER Working Papers (Vol. 01).
Dagan, I., Dolan, B., Magnini, B., & Roth, D. (2009). Recognizing textual entailment: Rational, evaluation and approaches. In Natural Language Engineering (Vol. 15, Issue 4). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324909990209
Dagan, I., Dolan, B., Magnini, B., & Roth, D. (2010). Erratum: Recognizing textual entailment: Rational, evaluation and approaches. In Natural Language Engineering (Vol. 16, Issue 1, p. 105). https://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324909990234
Dagan, I., Glickman, O., & Magnini, B. (2006). The PASCAL Recognising Textual Entailment Challenge. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 3944 LNAI, 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/11736790_9
Dagan, I., Roth, D., Sammons, M., Zanzotto, F. M., Fondazione, B. M., & Kessler, B. (2013). Recognizing Textual Entailment: Models and Applications. 23. https://doi.org/10.1162/COLI
Elshazly, M., Haggag, M., & Ehssan, S. A. (2021). Natural Language Processing Applications: A New Taxonomy using Textual Entailment. In IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications (Vol. 12, Issue 5). https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2021.0120580
Feng, J., Zhou, Y., & Martin, T. (2008). Combining lexical resources with fuzzy set theory for recognizing textual entailment. 2008 International Seminar on Business and Information Management, ISBIM 2008, 2, 54–57. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISBIM.2008.107
Fernández, E. M., & Cairns, H. S. (2011). Fundamentals of psycholinguistics (Vol. 01).
Ferreira, A., & Schwieter, J. W. (2015). Psycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting (A. Ferreira & J. W. Schwieter, Eds.; Vol. 115). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.115
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017). The Discovery of Grounded Theory Strategies for Qualitative Research. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203793206
Hancox, E. S. and P. (2002). Representation, Coherence and Inference. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 103(3), 239–248. https://doi.org/10.1023/A
Kahn-Horwitz, J., & Goldstein, Z. (2024). English foreign language reading and spelling diagnostic assessments informing teaching and learning of young learners. Language Testing, 41(1), 60–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322231162838
Linyang, Y. (2021). An Analysis of English Reading Comprehension From the Perspective of Psycholinguistics. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210206.019
Majerus, S. (2013). Language repetition and short-term memory: An integrative framework. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, JUL. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00357
Maric, M., Heyne, D. A., Van Widenfelt, B. M., & Westenberg, P. M. (2011). Distorted cognitive processing in youth: The structure of negative cognitive errors and their associations with anxiety. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 35(1), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-009-9285-3
McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. (2009). Chapter 9 Toward a Comprehensive Model of Comprehension. In Psychology of Learning and Motivation - Advances in Research and Theory (Vol. 51, pp. 297–384). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(09)51009-2
Michael, E., & Keane, M. (2020). Cognitive psychology. In The Social Science Encyclopedia (8th ed.). https://doi.org/10.5840/thought1940152181
Naumoska, A., & Kalajdžisalihović, N. (2023). Introduction to Psycholinguistics: Selected Readings. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374725312_Introduction_to_Psycholinguistics_Selected_Readings?enrichId=rgreq-eae373d15e13536b328f12e4ceb8a43f-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM3NDcyNTMxMjtBUzoxMTQzMTI4MTE5ODM5MDA2NEAxNjk3MzIwODEyMTc1&el=1_x_2&_esc=publicationCoverPdf
Nguyen, M. T. (2020). Understanding listening comprehension processing and challenges encountered: Research perspectives. International Journal of English Language and Literature Studies, 9(2), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.23.2020.92.63.75
Pham, M. Q. N., Nguyen, M. Le, & Shimazu, A. (2012). Learning to Recognize Textual Entailment in Japanese Texts with the Utilization of Machine Translation. ACM Transactions on Asian Language Information Processing, 11(4). https://doi.org/10.1145/2382593.2382596
Putra, I. M. S., Siahaan, D., & Saikhu, A. (2023). Recognizing textual entailment: A review of resources, approaches, applications, and challenges. In ICT Express. Korean Institute of Communications and Information Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icte.2023.08.012
Samuels, S. J., & Näslund, J. C. (2006). Individual differences in reading: The case for lexical access. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 10(4), 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057356940100402
Schriefers, H., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1990). Exploring the time course of lexical access in language production: Picture-word interference studies. Journal of Memory and Language, 29(1), 86–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(90)90011-N
Shook, A., Goldrick, M., Engstler, C., & Marian, V. (2015). Bilinguals Show Weaker Lexical Access During Spoken Sentence Comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 44(6), 789–802. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-014-9322-6
Smith, R., Snow, P., Serry, T., & Hammond, L. (2021). The Role of Background Knowledge in Reading Comprehension: A Critical Review. Reading Psychology, 42(3), 214–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2021.1888348
Sugiyono, Prof. Dr. (2013). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan r & d. In NBER Working Papers (Vol. 01). http://www.nber.org/papers/w16019
Suhaemin, S., & Arikunto, S. (2013). Manajemen Perpustakaan Di Madrasah Aliyah Negeri Yogyakarta. Jurnal Akuntabilitas Manajemen Pendidikan, 1(2), 252–268. https://doi.org/10.21831/amp.v1i2.2398
Tarchi, C. (2015). Fostering reading comprehension of expository texts through the activation of readers’ prior knowledge and inference-making skills. International Journal of Educational Research, 72, 80–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2015.04.013
Tourimpampa, A., Drigas, A., & Economou, A. (2017). Relation of Memory and Linguistic Fields and ICT Tools for Memory and Language Comprehension. International Journal of Recent Contributions from Engineering, Science & IT (IJES), 5(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijes.v5i1.6275
Yilmaz, K. (2011). The Cognitive Perspective on Learning: Its Theoretical Underpinnings and Implications for Classroom Practices. Source: The Clearing House, 84(5), 204–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.201
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Fajar Biantoro, Yanuarius Yanu Dharmawan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
