Reading Comprehension Predictors: Сognitive Characteristics of the Reader and Implicit Meanings in the Text

PII

S3034588X26010067-1

DOI

10.7868/S3034588X26010067

Publication Type

Article

Status

Published

Authors

V.A. Obolskaia

Occupation: Research Engineer, Department of Psychology
Affiliation: St. Petersburg State University

O.V. Shcherbakova

Occupation: Ph.D. (Psychology), Leading Research Fellow, Cognitive Health and Intelligence Centre
Affiliation: National Research University “Higher School of Economics”

Volume/ Edition

Volume 47 / Issue number 1

Pages

57-68

Abstract

Our study aimed to identify predictors of reading comprehension, motivated by the growing body of evidence regarding difficulties in semantic reading among healthy adults. We hypothesized that (1) predictors of the text comprehension include both cognitive characteristics of readers — specifically psychometric intelligence (IQ), Theory of Mind (ToM), and “equivalence range” and “field dependence-independence” cognitive styles — as well as their ability to identify various types of implicit meanings within the semantic structure of a text; and (2) different cognitive characteristics are associated with the identification of distinct types of implicit meanings. Fifty participants (36 females; aged 22–57 years) were individually assessed for abovementioned cognitive characteristics and then participated in in-depth semi-structured interviews on text comprehension. Regression analysis of the proposed predictors revealed no significant contribution of ToM and cognitive styles to the text comprehension. However, it demonstrated a combined effect of IQ and the diversity of implicit meaning types identified by respondents. Identification of specific types, namely, character contrasts and symbols. Additionally, findings suggest potential indirect associations between certain cognitive characteristics and text comprehension, mediated by their relationship with the understanding of particular types of implicit meanings. These findings (1) align with theoretical frameworks and extend knowledge about the contribution of IQ to reading comprehension, underscoring the necessity of considering the specific roles of readers’ cognitive characteristics in distinct aspects of comprehension; and (2) suggest that accounting for various forms of indirect meaning transmission in texts is productive for investigating the combination of intellectual operations underpinning text comprehension and the influence of readers’ cognitive traits on this process.

Keywords

понимание чтение текст имплицитный смысл модель психического психометрический интеллект широта диапазона эквивалентности полезависимость–поленезависимость

Date of publication

06.06.2026

Date of Year of publication

2026

Number of purchasers

Views

References

Reference

1. Аверьянова (Обольская) В.А., Щербакова О.В. между текстом и читателем: инструментарий для изучения понимания имплицитных смыслов вербальных текстов. часть 1 // Вопросы психолингвистики, 2022. Т. 3. № 53. С. 42-61. @@Averianova (Obolskaia) V.A., Shcherbakova O.V. Mezhdu tekstom i chitatelem: instrumentarij dlya izucheniya ponimaniya implicitnyh smyslov verbal'nyh tekstov. Chast 1 // Voprosy psiholingvistiki, 2022. V. 3. № 53. P. 42-61. (In Russian)
2. Алехин А.Н., Грекова А.А. “Псевдопсихопатологические” формы мышления в современных условиях // Вестник психотерапии. 2018. Т. 66. № 71. С. 137–151.
3. Андрющенко Е.А., Гольштейн Ю.Р., Щербакова О.В. Полнота понимания многозначных текстов у лиц с различными уровнями эмоционального интеллекта и модели психического // Вопросы психологии. 2020. Т. 66. № 6. С. 69–80.
4. Брудный А.А. Психологическая герменевтика. м.: лабиринт, 2005.
5. Веккер Л.М. Психические процессы. Том 2. л.: изд-во ленингр. ун-та, 1976.
6. Ермакова Е.В. имплицитность в художественном тексте: Дис. ... д-ра филол. наук. Саратов, 2010.
7. Залевская А.А. Текст и его понимание. Тверь: ТгУ, 2001.
8. Зейгарник Б.В. Патопсихология. м.: изд-во московского университета, 1976.
9. Знаков В.В. Психология понимания: Проблемы и перспективы. м.: институт психологии РАН, 2005.
10. Леонтьев А.А. Основы психолингвистики. СПб.: лань, 2003.
11. Медведская Е.И. Особенности мышления взрослых активных интернет-пользователей // Этносы и судьбы в современном социуме: теория и практика: коллективная монография. брест: бргТУ, 2023. С. 68–76.
12. Холодная М.А. Когнитивные стили: о природе индивидуального ума: Учеб. пособие. м.: ПеР СЭ, 2002.
13. Холодная М.А. Психология интеллекта: Парадоксы исследования. СПб.: Питер, 2002.
14. Щербакова О.В. Дефициты смыслового чтения у молодых взрослых: проявление несфомированности понятийного мышления // Психологический журнал. 2024. Т. 45. № 1. С. 19–31
15. Щербакова О.В., Обольская В.А. между читателем и текстом: инструментарий для изучения понимания имплицитных смыслов вербальных текстов. часть 2 // Вопросы психолингвистики, 2023. Т. 1. № 55. С. 112–127. @@Shcherbakova O.V., Obolskaia V.A. Mezhdu chitatelem i tekstom: instrumentarij dlya izucheniya ponimaniya implicitnyh smyslov verbal'nyh tekstov. Chast 2 // Voprosy psiholingvistiki, 2023. V. 1. № 55. P. 112–127. (In Russian).
16. Adejumo D. Effect of cognitive style on strategies for comprehension of prose // Perception & Motor Skills. 1983. № 56. P. 859–863.
17. Bruner J.S. On perceptual readiness // Psychological Review. 1957. Vol. 64, P. 123–152.
18. Cacciari С. Cognitive and personality components underlying spoken idiom comprehension in context. An exploratory study // Frontiers in Psychology. 2018. Vol. 9:659.
19. de-la-Peña C., Luque-Rojas M.J. Levels of Reading Comprehension in Higher Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021. Vol. 12:712901.
20. Fauconnier G. Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
21. Freed E.M., Hamilton S.T., Long D.L. Comprehension in proficient readers: The nature of individual variation // Journ. of Memory and Language. 2017. Vol. 97. P. 135–153.
22. Happé F.G. Communicative competence and theory of mind in autism: A test of relevance theory // Cognition. 1993. Vol. 48. № 2. P. 101–119.
23. Hite C.E. Expository content area texts, cognitive style and gender: Their effects on reading comprehension // Literacy Research and Instruction. 2004. Vol. 43. № 4. P. 41–74.
24. Kidd D., Ongis M., Castano E. On literary fiction and its effects on theory of mind // Scientific Study of Literature. 2016. Vol. 6. P. 42–58.
25. Marold G.K. Multidimensional Scaling of the Cognitive Control Principle-Equivalence Range and Implications for Reading Comprehension // U.S. Department of Health, Education & Welfare. National institute of education. 1975. P. 1–56
26. Pelletier J., Beatty R. Children’s understanding of Aesop’s fables: relations to reading comprehension and theory of mind // Frontiers in Psychology. 2015. Vol. 89(6): 1448.
27. Raven J. The Raven Progressive Matrices: A review of national norming studies and ethnic and socioeconomic variation within the United States // Journal of Educational Measurement. 1989. Vol. 26. No. 1. P. 1–16.
28. Serafica F.C., Sigel I.E. Styles of categorization and reading disability // Journal of Reading Behavior. 1970. Vol. 2. P. 105–115.
29. Shcherbakova O.V., Nikiforova E.A. Fables comprehension in healthy adults: does IQ matter? // Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics. 2018. Vol. 15. No. 2. P. 222–230.
30. Spiro R., Tirre W. Individual differences in schema utilization during discourse processing // Journal of Educational Psychology. 1980. Vol. 72. No. 2. P. 204–208.
31. Stamenković D., Ichien N., Holyoak K.J. Individual Differences in Comprehension of Contextualized Metaphors // Metaphor and Symbol. 2020. Vol. 35. No. 4. P. 285–301.
32. Tilmatine M. Exploring individual differences in recognizing idiomatic expressions in context. // Journ. of Cognition. 2021. Vol. 4. No. 1:37.
33. van Dijk T.A., Kintsch W. Strategies of discourse comprehension. NY: Academic Press, 1983.