ERC411_C3_BI

8/12/2019 ERC411_C3_BI

1/13

ERC411 READING IN SECOND LANGUAGE CONTEXTS

THEORIES OFREADING:INTERACTIVEMODELCHAPTER

LEARNING OUTCOME

Upon completion of this chapter, you should be able to:

1. describe the interactive model from the point of view of fourdifferent researchers;

2. apply the suitable interactive model to second language readingstudents;

3. discuss how the interactive model integrates the bottom-up andtop-down models of reading; and

4. explain how the interactive model overcomes the limitations ofthe bottom-up and top-down models of reading.

8/12/2019 ERC411_C3_BI

2/13

Theories of Reading: Interactive Model CHAPTER 3

1

INTRODUCTION

In Chapter 2, you have been introduced to two contrasting models of reading namely; bottom-up and top-down models of reading. In this chapter, you will learn about the interactive model

which seeks to integrate these two contrasting earlier models.

Different views of the interactive models will be discussed, compared and contrasted for acomprehensive understanding of the interactive processes in reading. A discussion on how thismodel overcomes the strengths and limitations of the earlier models of reading is also provided.

3.0 INTERACTIVE MODELS OF READING

In the last chapter, you have read about two different models of reading. One is the bottom-upmodel which is text driven where the main emphasis is placed on identification skills.

Reading is perceived as a decoding process, beginning the print before it will be passed to thehigher levels of processing. Each level is carried out as a linear and discrete process involving theprecise, sequential identification of letters, words, phrases, clauses, sentences and theirpronunciation.

On the other hand, the top-down model is reader driven or concept driven because meaning isderived from the conceptual information of the readers instead of the text. For meaning to bederived, readers are engaged in a cycle of forming a hypothesis, sampling the input, testing it,either re-hypothising or confirming the hypothesis, and sampling again.

Therefore, there need to be a model, which combines these contrasting views so that a morecomprehensive understanding on the reading processes can be achieved. Such a model will needto recognize the contributions of both the text and the reader. It needs to recognize the role ofidentification and interpretation and perceive reading as an active, interactive process. This isfulfilled by the third model of reading, namely, the interactive model of reading. The nature ofthe different kinds interactions involved in reading has been defined differently by differentresearchers.

In your opinion, what should be the main factors that need to be

addressed by a more comprehensive model of reading?

8/12/2019 ERC411_C3_BI

3/13

CHAPTER 3 Theories of Reading: Interactive Model ..........................

2

Hence, this chapter discusses the interactive model from the point of views of differentresearchers. Proponents of the interactive model are:

1. Rumelhart (1977)2. Stanovich (1980,1981)3. Eskey (1986)4. Grabe (1991)

3.0.1 RUMELHARTS (1977) INTERACTIVE MODEL OF READING

According to Rumelhart (1977:573), reading is at once a perceptual and a cognitive processwhich begins with a flutter of patterns on the retina and ends (when successful) with a definiteidea about the authors intended message.

Rumelharts statement is similar to the view of Gough (1972) who asserts that reading begins

with the eyes identifying visual information from the text.

For Rumelhart (1977) (refer to Figure 3.1) visual information in the form of graphemesis takenin during a fixation and is placed at the visual information store. Then, a feature extractiondevice will extract the critical features from the grapheme input and pass these features assensory input to the pattern synthesiser. The pattern synthesiser comprises various types of non-sensory information such as knowledge about orthographic, lexical, syntactical, semantic andpragmatic features.

Here, the most important meaning construction process takes place where all of the varioussources of knowledge, both sensory and non-sensory, come together at one place and the

reading process is the product of the simultaneous joint application of all the knowledge sources(Rumelhart 1977:588).

Discuss the interactive model or reading generally. How is this

model differ or similar to the reading models before it?

From the sentence above, what skill or knowledge can be inferred

that the interactive model place emphasis upon?

8/12/2019 ERC411_C3_BI

4/13


3

Figure 3.1: Rumelhart (1977:588) interactive model

To coordinate the simultaneous interaction of these different types of knowledge, there is amechanism referred to as the message centre which will retain the information in a temporarystore. This is necessary so that each individual type of knowledge source can deal with theinformation through the process of hypothesis testing.

Each knowledge source contains specialized knowledge of the reading process and it will test theinformation in the pattern synthesizer according to its own area of specialization. Eachhypothesis will be constructed, tested, and confirmed before moving on to the next hypothesis,or disconfirmed and re-hypothesized.

The process of hypothesis testing will go on until the most probable interpretation of the text isachieved. At any time, a specific type of knowledge may also use the information provided by theother sources of knowledge. The reading process is neither a purely bottom-up process nor apurely top-down analysis.Rather, the hypothesis can be generated at any level (Rumelhart1977:591).

Rumelharts model allows for simultaneous processing of all sources of knowledge both datadriven and concept driven instead of lower level processes proceeding in a discrete lock-step

nature, not allowing higher level processing to influence lower level processes. The multi stages

Can you recall, which researcher, in the last chapter, who also

view reading as a process of hypothesis testing?

8/12/2019 ERC411_C3_BI

5/13


4

of processing are interrelated and interact in a parallel nature at the message centre to producecomprehension.

3.0.2 STANOVICH (1980,1981) INTERACTIVE MODEL OF READING

Similar to Rumelhart (1977), Stanovich (1980,1981) asserts that several types of knowledge aresimultaneously processed for an interpretation to be achieved. Stanovich (1980:63) states thatinteractive models assume that pattern is synthesised based on information providedsimultaneously from several knowledge sources.

Stanovich (1980, 1981), however, elaborates the interactive model and integrates it with what isreferred to as the compensatory assumption which states that a deficit in any knowledge sourceresults in a heavier reliance on other knowledge sources, regardless of their level in theprocessing hierarchy (1980:63).

This means any type of knowledge may interact with any other type of knowledge at any stagesimultaneously when processing a text. But more importantly, a weak knowledge source mayrely on better-developed knowledge sources to compensate for its weakness. For example,readers who are struggling to identify the words in the reading text but who have someknowledge of the chapter may rely on higher stages of processing to compensate for theirdecoding weakness.

On the other hand, skilled readers who may be reading a text on a subject they are unfamiliarwith may rely on their decoding skills to identify the written materials. Good readers, however,are thought to have a wider range of compensatory strategies compared to poor readers.Interactive models of reading appear to provide a more accurate conceptualization of readingperformance than do strictly top-down or bottom-up models. When combined with an

assumption of compensatory processing (that a deficit in any particular process will result ingreater reliance on other knowledge sources, regardless of their level of processing hierarchy),interactive models provide a better account of the existing data on the use of orthographicstructure and sentence context by good and poor readers.(Stanovich 1980:32).

In your opinion, do advanced readers also face challenges in

reading where they need to rely on a better developed language

source to compensate for this weakness?

Make comparison between Rumelhart and Stanovich views of

Interactive model. Are there any differences or similarities?

8/12/2019 ERC411_C3_BI

6/13


5

3.0.3 ESKEYS (1986) INTERACTIVE MODEL OF READING

According to Eskey (1986), reading is a cognitive process. The cognitive structure or the braincomprises two kinds of knowledge which is relevant to reading, they are, the knowledge of formand knowledge of substance (refer to Figure 3.2).

Figure 3.2: Two kinds of knowledge relevant to reading

Knowledge of form refers to the readers knowledge of language such as graphohonic, lexis,

syntax, semantics, and knowledge of the rhetorical structure. Knowledge of form helps readerswith the process of identifying the print. Knowledge of substance refers to the content or theconceptual structure of the text. It comprises cultural, pragmatic and subject specific knowledge.

If the readers are fluent, they may be able to identify the print automatically and rapidly. Poor orbeginner readers on the other hand, may need to rely more on their identification skills i.e.knowledge of forms. Knowledge of substance helps readers in forming and revising predictionsas interpretation of the text is constructed. Based on the information received through the eyes,the brain will process these two knowledge interactively and provide a personal reconstruction ofthe text.

The term interactive refers to the interaction of several types of knowledge (refer to figure 3.3).

Readers will employ both the skill to identify and the skill to interpret the text during the act ofreading simultaneously. The only difference is beginner readers may rely more on knowledge of

What kind of readers will rely more on knowledge of forms

compared to knowledge of substance?

What kind of readers will rely more on knowledge of substance

compared to knowledge of forms?

8/12/2019 ERC411_C3_BI

7/13


6

form as their identification skills are not automatic. Since more energy is spent on identificationskills, beginner readers may not focus as much on the process of interpretation.

Nevertheless, the process of identifying the print or decoding will be done within the frameworkof what they know of the larger conceptual structure of the text, or top down. This means they

will be identifying the print using their prior knowledge, that is, the knowledge of the world asdiscussed in the last chapter.

In the case of fluent readers, since their identification skills are efficient and automatic, they areable to employ more interpretative skills. At all times, they will still identify the written stimulus.

According to Carrell, Devine and Eskey (1992:59) interactive models of reading assume thatskills at all levels are interactively available to process and interpret the text instead of giving anydirectional bias, such as, bottom up or top down.

Figure 3.3: Categories of Knowledge Crucial to ReadingSource: Dubin, Eskey and Grabe (1986:18)

8/12/2019 ERC411_C3_BI

8/13


7

3.0.4 GRABES (1991) INTERACTIVE MODEL OF READING

According to Grabe (1991), the term interactive refers to two concepts:

1. reader-text interaction; and2. simultaneous processing of many component skills.

First, the concept refers to reader-text interaction where readers reconstruct meaning based onthe printed text and their prior knowledge. Prior knowledge provides readers with certainexpectations that help in making predictions regarding the meaning of the text. This priorknowledge is what Eskey (1986) refers to as knowledge of substance and knowledge of forms asin Figure 3.3.

Second, the term interactive refers to the simultaneous processing of many component skills

(refer to Figure 3.4).

Both the knowledge of substance and the knowledge of forms will interact simultaneously whenprocessing the printed text during the course of reconstructing the message. In other words,reading involves the interaction of lower level rapid, automatic identification skills and an arrayof higher-level comprehension/interpretation skills (Grabe 1991:383).

Instead of a certain predetermined direction of processing such as bottom-up or top-down, theinteractive view perceives reading as a selective, simultaneous processing of different types ofinformationvisual, orthographic, lexical, semantical, syntactical and pragmatic.

Can you name any component skill that may be included in

Grabes (1991) model of reading?

8/12/2019 ERC411_C3_BI

9/13


8

Figure 3.4: Grabe (1988:59) interactive modelSource: Adaptation from Grabe (1988 : 59) interactive model

3.1THE STRENGTHS OF THE INTERACTIVE MODEL OFREADING

Overall, the interactive models seem now preferred to the two more extreme models of reading.

According to Bernhardt (1986), there is a paradigm shift from the top-down to the interactiveview in the world of reading. The interactive model recognizes the importance of lower-levelprocessing skills and, at the same time, takes into account the crucial contribution of higher-levelprocessing skills.

Can you think of the strengths of interactive model of reading?

8/12/2019 ERC411_C3_BI

10/13


9

Reading is now perceived not as a linear, discrete, sequential series of processes, but as a non-directional process where knowledge from different sources interacts to produce the mostappropriate interpretation of a message.

Figure 3.5: The emphases of interactive model

3.1.1OVERCOMING THE LIMITATIONS OF BOTTOM-UP MODEL AND

TOP-DOWN MODEL

The interactive model managed to overcome many of the limitations of the earlier bottom-up

and top-down models of reading. The bottom-up model perceives reading as a serial processbeginning from the print to the lower levels of processing before it will be passed on to thehigher levels of processing. Each level of processing is a linear, sequential and discrete process.

Such sequential reading process like the bottom-up model does not allow for the processes thatoccur later to influence the processes that occurred earlier. The lack of interaction does notexplain how factors such as prior knowledge of the subject matter or culture might influencecomprehension. Readers are also not perceived as active and interactive information processors

who are able to reconstruct meaning according to their purpose of reading and prior knowledge.As mentioned before, the top-down models over-emphasise higher level skills so much so thatlittle attention is given to the development of lower level skills. Top-down theorists such as

Kolers (1966 in Smith 1982) asserts that reading is only incidentally visual. This suggests readersdo not attend to words. They attend to meaning, which is highly determined by their purpose forreading and their predictions.

However, previous research has provided evidence that better readers are not only better atinterpreting texts, they are also better decoders (Adams 1990). They do not just rely on theirpredictive skills to interpret the texts, they do in fact read most words on a printed page in a veryprecise and rapid manner. This means identification or decoding is an important reading skill.Better readers are found to be better decoders in that they are able to identify the orthographicinformation automatically (Stanovich 1981). Since their identification skills are automatic, theyhave more energy to concentrate on the message and predict the content. To assume that

efficient readers do not attend to visual information is misguided.

8/12/2019 ERC411_C3_BI

11/13


10

Figure 3.6: What better readers can do

The interactive model manages to overcome such limitation because it recognizes thecontribution of the text and the importance of identification process. This allows readers to bemore accurate at reading the message that is actually written. Such accuracy is vital when readersread texts which they are over familiar with. By focusing on the forms in the text, readers will beable to construct the intended message rather than the message that they think should be there ina situation that was referred to over reading in the last chapter. Such a situation tends to be facedby advanced readers.

Stanovichs (1980, 1981), model can also be employed to explain a shortcoming of the top-downmodel regarding readers over-reading a text which they are very familiar with. In this situation,knowledge of substance may have induced the reader to extensively predict the text and haveimpeded them from checking their hypothesis with the printed information. According to Hedge(1991:162), Readers who make extensive use of intelligent guessing strategies may well do so atthe expense of evaluating upcoming text data which does not conform to their guesses.

At the other end of the spectrum, Eskey (1988:93) stresses that top-down models de-emphasisethe perceptual and decoding of the language of the text and do not provide a true picture ofthe problems faced by less skilled readers. Poor readers, L1 or L2, may not be able to generateaccurate predictions or accurate hypotheses. Even fluent readers, if faced with unfamiliar texts,may not be able to form accurate hypotheses.

According to Stanovich (1980), readers are able to rely on other knowledge sources tocompensate for their weaker ones in constructing the intended meaning. They may rely on onestronger aspect of the model to compensate for weakness in another. Stanovich asserts that aprocess at any level can compensate for deficiencies at any other level (1981:32).

For L2 reading, Hedge (1991:158) asserts that interactive models can account for the culturaland experiential variety and significance therein of NNS (Non-native Speaker) readers and itstresses the interaction, be that interaction simultaneous or deferred, of top-down and bottom-up processes.

Background knowledge such as cultural knowledge plays a major role in reading comprehension.A deficit in background knowledge may make comprehension very difficult, if not impossible. Incontrast, its availability may facilitate comprehension. The contribution of prior knowledge toreading comprehension brings our discussion to schema theory.

8/12/2019 ERC411_C3_BI

12/13


11

SUMMARY

This chapter introduces you to the interactive models of reading. These models areparticularly useful because of their flexibility that allows them to compensate andovercome problems faced by exclusively top-down and bottom-up models of reading.

There chapter introduces the student to the different interactive models in chronologicalprogression to show how the idea has developed over the space of three decades.

Exposure to these models should allow the students a degree of freedom to be eclectic informing their own opinions about reading.

Assume you are teaching a text on Thanksgiving Celebrations.

Do you anticipate your students to face any problems if you let

them read on their own? Give your reasons.

In your opinion, which interactive model do you think is most

applicable to second language (L2) reading? Explain.

In what way does the interactive model provide a better

explanatory power compared to the bottom-up and top-down

model? Discuss.

1. Briefly describe Rumelharts (1977) interactive model.(a) What does he mean by simultaneous processing of

knowledge?

(b)What is meaning construction in Rumelharts model?

2. What does Grabe (1991) mean by interactive?(a) How is this term important to reading?(b)How do the component skills contribute to reading?

8/12/2019 ERC411_C3_BI

13/13


12

GLOSSARY

Cognitive constructed in the mind.

Hypothesis an idea of how something will happen.

Perceptual engaged though the senses.

SimultaneousInteraction

contact or exchanges that happen at the same time.

Synthesiser machine or thing that produces an imitation of something, e.g. sound, sightet cetera.

Documents

ERC411_C3_BI