Grant proposal (References, Coh-Metrix Publications)

McNamara, D.S., Louwerse, M.M. & Graesser, A.C. (unpublished). Coh-Metrix: Automated cohesion and coherence scores to predict text readability and facilitate comprehension. Grant proposal. [PDF]

References

Aulls, M. W. (1975). Expository paragraph properties that influence literal recall. Journal of Reading Behavior, 7, 391-399.

Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & van Rijn, H. (Eds.) (1993). The CELEX Lexical Database [CD-ROM]. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.

Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., Omanson, R. C., & Pople, M. T. (1984). Improving the comprehensibility of stories: The effects of revisions that improve coherence. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 263 - 277.

Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., Sinatra, G. M., & Loxterman, J.A. (1991). Revising social studies text from a text-processing perspective: Evidence of improved comprehensibility. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 251-276.

Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Britton, B. K., & Gulgoz, S. (1991). Using Kintsch’s computational model to improve instructional text: Effects of repairing inference calls on recall and cognitive structures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 329-345.

Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Cataldo, M. G., & Oakhill, J. (2000). Why are poor comprehenders inefficient searchers? An investigation into the effects of text representation and spatial memory on the ability to locate information in text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 791-799.

Chall, J., Jacobs, V., & Baldwin, L. (1990). The reading crisis. Why poor children fall behind. Cambridge, A: Harvard University Press.

Charniak, E. (2000). A maximum-entropy-inspired parser. Proceedings of the First Conference on North American Chapter of the Association For Computational Linguistics (pp. 132-139). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

Clements, P. (1978-79). The effects of staging on recall of prose. Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 8-9.

Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC psycholinguistic database quarterly. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 497-505.

Cupples, L. (2002). The structural characteristics and on-line comprehension of experiencer-verb sentences. Language and Cognitive Processes, 17, 125-162.

Fellbaum, C. (Ed.). (1998). WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database [CD-ROM]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Gernsbacher, M, A. (1997). Two decades of structure building. Discourse Processes, 23, 265-304.

Goldman, S., Graesser, A.C., & van den Broek, P. (1999)(Eds). Narrative comprehension, causality, and coherence. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Goldman, S.R., Graesser, A.C., & van den Broek, P. (1999). Essays in honor of Tom Trabasso. In Goldman, S.R., Graesser, A.C., and van den Broek, P. (Eds). Narrative comprehension, causality, and coherence (pp. 1-10). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Graesser, A.C., Leon, J.A., & Otero, J.C. (2002). Introduction to the psychology of science text comprehension. In J. Otero, J.A. Leon, & A.C. Graesser (Eds). The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 1-15). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. [PDF]

Graesser, A.C., Olde, B. A., & Klettke, B. (2002). How does the mind construct and represent stories? In M. Green, J. Strange, and T. Brock (Eds.), Narrative Impact: Social and Cognitive Foundations. Mahwah: NJ: Erlbaum. [PDF]

Graesser, A.C., & Person, N. P. (2002). Discourse: Cognitive perspective. In J.W. Guthrie (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Education. New York: Macmillan.

Graesser, A.C., Person, N., & Hu, X. (2002). Improving comprehension through discourse processes. New Directions in Teaching and Learning, 89, 33-44.

Graesser, A.C., Klettke, B. (2001). Plot, agency, and a structural affect theory of literary short story comprehension. In S. Steen and D. Schram (Eds.), Psychology and Sociology of Literature. [PDF]

Graesser, A.C., Person, N., Harter, D., & TRG (2001). Teaching tactics and dialog in AutoTutor. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education.

Graesser, A.C., Pomeroy, V., & Craig, S. (2001). Psychological and computational research on theme comprehension. In W. van Peer and M.M. Louwerse (Eds.), Thematics in psychology and literary studies (pp. 19-34). Albany: SUNY Press.

Graesser, A.C., Wiemer-Hastings, P., & Wiemer-Hastings, K. (2001). Constructing inferences and relations during text comprehension. In T.Sanders, J. Schilperoord, & W. Spooren (Eds.), Text representation: Linguistic and psycholinguistic aspects. (pp. 249-271). Amsterdam: Benjamins. [PDF]

Graesser, A.C., Bowers, C.A., Bayen, U.J., Hu, X. (2000). Who said what? Who knows what? Tracking speakers and knowledge in narrative. In W. van Peer & S. Chatman, (Eds.), Narrative perspective: Cognition and emotion (pp. 255-272). New York: SUNY Press.

Graesser, A.C., Wiemer-Hastings, K., Kreuz, R., & Wiemer-Hastings, P., & Marques, K. (2000). QUAID: A questionnaire evaluation aid for survey methodologists. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 32, 254-262.

Graesser, A., Wiemer-Hastings, P., Wiemer-Hastings, K., Harter, D.,Person, N., & the Tutoring Research Group. (2000). Using Latent Semantic Analysis to evaluate the contributions of students in AutoTutor. Interactive Learning Environments, 8 , 149-169.

Graesser, A.C., Bowers, C.A., Olde, B., & Pomeroy, V. (1999). Who said what? Source memory for narrator and character agents in literary short stories. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 284-300.

Graesser, A.C., Bowers, C., Olde, B., White, K., & Person, N. (1999). Who knows what: Propagation of knowledge among agents in a literary storyworld. Poetics: Journal of Empirical Research on Literature, the Media, and the Arts, 26, 143-175.

Graesser, A.C., Kennedy, T., Wiemer-Hastings, P., & Ottati, V. (1999). The use of computational cognitive models to improve questions on surveys and questionnaires. In M.G. Sirken, D.J. Hermann, S. Schechter, N. Schwarz, J.M. Tanur, & R. Tourangeau (Eds.), Cognition and survey methods research (pp 69-86). New York: Wiley.

Graesser, A.C., Kennedy, T.., Wiemer-Hastings, P., & Ottati, V.C. (1999). The use of computational cognitive models to improve questions on surveys and questionnaires. In M.G. Sirken, T. Jabine, G. Willis, E. Martin, & C. Tucker (Eds), A new agenda for interdisciplinary survey research methods (p. 28). Hyatstsville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services.

Graesser, A.C., & Wiemer-Hastings, K. (1999). Situation models and concepts in story comprehension. In Goldman, S.R., Graesser, A.C., and van den Broek, P. (Eds), Narrative comprehension, causality, and coherence (pp. 77-92). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

Graesser, A. C., Person, N. K., & Magliano, J. P. (1995). Collaborative dialogue patterns in naturalistic one-to-one tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 1-28.

Graesser, A. C., & Clark, L. F. (1985). Structures and procedures of implicit knowledge. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Haberlandt, K. F., & Graesser, A. C. (1985). Component processes in text comprehension and some of their interactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 357-374.

Halliday, M.A.K. & R. Hasan (1976). Cohesion in English. London, Longman.

Haviland, S. E., & Clark, H. H. (1974). What's new? Acquiring new information as a process in comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 512-521.

Herskovits, A. (1998). Schematization. In P. Olivier & K. P. Gapp (Eds.), Representation and processing of spatial expressions (pp. 149-162). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hobbs, J.R. (1977). Resolving pronoun references. Lingua, 44, 311-338.

Holms, D.I. & Forsyth, R.S. (1995). The Federalist revisited: New directions in authorship attribution. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 10, 111-127

Jarvis, S. (2006, July). Examining the properties of lexical diversity through quantitative and qualitative means. Paper presented at Sociolinguistics Symposium 16, University of Limerick, Ireland.

Jurafsky, D., & Martin, J. (2000). Speech and language processing. Englewood, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Kieras, D. E. (1978). Good and bad structure in simple paragraphs: Effects on apparent theme, reading time, and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 13-28.

Kintsch, E. (1990). Macroprocesses and microprocesses in the development of summarization skill. Cognition and Instruction, 7, 161-195.

Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Klare, G. R. (1974-1975). Assessing readability. Reading Research Quarterly, 10, 62-102.

Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P. W., & Laham, D. (1998). An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 259-284.

Lappin, S., & Leass, H. J. (1994). An algorithm for pronominal coreference resolution. Computational Linguistics, 20, 535-561.

Lehman, S., & Schraw, G. (2002). Effects of coherence and relevance on shallow and deep text processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 738-750.

Levenshtein, V. (1966). Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions and reversals. Cybernetics and Control Theory. Soviet Physics Doklady, 10, 707-710.

Linderholm, T. Everson, M. G., van den Broek, P., Mischinski, M., Crittenden, A., & Samuels, J. (2000). Effects of causal text revisions on more and less skilled readers?comprehension of easy and difficult text. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 525-556.

Lorch, R. F., Jr., & Lorch, E.P. (1996). Effects of headings on text recall and summarization. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 261-278.

Louwerse, M.M. & Van Peer, W. (2002). Thematics: Interdisciplinary Studies. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins.

Louwerse, M.M. (2002). Computational retrieval of themes. In M. M. Louwerse & W. van Peer (eds.), Thematics: Interdisciplinary Studies (pp. 189-212). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins. [PDF]

Louwerse, M.M. (2001). An analytic and cognitive parameterization of coherence relations. Cognitive Linguistics, 12, 291–315. [PDF]

Louwerse, M.M. & Graesser, A.C. (in press). Coherence in discourse. In Strazny, P. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Linguistics. Chicago, Fitzroy Dearborn.

Louwerse, M.M. & Hite Mitchell, H. (in press). Towards a taxonomy of a set of discourse markers in dialog: a theoretical and computational linguistic account. Discourse Processes.

Loxterman, J. A., Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (1994). The effects of thinking aloud during reading on students' comprehension of more or less coherent text. Reading Research Quarterly, 29, 353-367.

Maas, H.D. 1972. Zusammenhang zwischen Wortschatzumfang und Länge eines Textes. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, 8, 73-79.

Malvern, D.D. Richards, B.J., Chipere, N., & Durán, P. (2004). Lexical diversity and language development: Quantification and assessment. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Marcus, M., Santorini, B., & Marcinkiewicz, M. A. (1993). Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics, 19, 313-330.

Martin, J.R. (1992). English text. System and structure. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

McNamara, D.S. (2001). Reading both high and low coherence texts: Effects of text sequence and prior knowledge. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55, 51-62.

McNamara, D.S. (2001). Reading both high and low coherence texts: Effects of text sequence and prior knowledge. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55, 51-62.

McNamara, D.S., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Learning from text: Effects of prior knowledge and text coherence. Discourse Processes, 22, 247-287. [PDF]

McNamara, D.S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N.B., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? Text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 1-43. [PDF]

McWhorter, J.H. (2001). The power of Babel: A natural history of language. Times Books: Henry Holt and Company, New York.

Meichenbaum, D., & Biemiller, A. (1998). Nurturing independent learners: Helping students take charge of their learning. Cambridge, MA: Brookline.

Miller, G. A, Beckwith, R., Fellbaum, C., Gross, D., & Miller, K. (1990). Five papers on WordNet (Tech. Rep.). Princeton University, Cognitive Science Laboratory.

Mitkov, R. (1998). Robust pronoun resolution with limited knowledge. Proceedings of the 18.th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (pp. 869-875). Montreal, Canada.

Prince, E. F. (1981). Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In P. Cole (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp. 223-255). New York: Academic Press.

Rus, V., & Hempelmann, C. (2005), Across-genres an empirical evaluation of state-of-the-art, Treebank-style Parsers. International Journal of Archives of Control Sciences, October.

Sekine, S., & Grishman, R. (1995). A corpus-based probabilistic grammar with only two non-terminals. Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Parsing Technology (pp. 216-223). Prague, Czech.

Smith, J. A., & Kelly, C. (2002). Stylistic constancy and change across literary corpora: Using measures of lexical richness to date works. Computers and the Humanities, 36, 411?30.

Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

Svartvik, J. (Ed.). (1980). The London corpus of spoken English: Description and research. Lund, Sweden: Lund University Press.

Templin, M. (1957). Certain language skills in children: Their development and interrelationships. Minneapolis, MN: The University of Minnesota Press.

Trabasso, T. & Van den Broek, P. (1985). Causal thinking and the representation of narrative events. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 612-630.

Vidal-abarca, E., Martinez, G., & Gilabert, R. (2000). Two procedures to improve instructional text: Effects on memory and learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 107-116.

Voss, J. F., & Silfies, N. L. (1996). Learning from history text: The interaction of knowledge and comprehension skill with text structure. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 45-68.

Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001). Examiner's manual. Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.

Yule, G.U. (1944). The Statistical study of Literary Vocabulary. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Zwaan, R. A., Langston, M. C., & Graesser, A. C. (1995). The construction of situation models in narrative comprehension: An event-indexing model. Psychological Science, 6, 292-297.

Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 162-185.

Coh-Metrix Publications ( Grant Proposal, References)

Cottrell, K., & McNamara, D.S. (2002). Cognitive precursors to science comprehension. Proceedings of the Twenty-fourth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. [PDF]

Graesser, A.C., Gernsbacher, M.A., & Goldman, S. (2003) (Eds.). Handbook of discourse processes. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Table of Contents Chapter 1 [PDF]

Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., & Louwerse, M. M. (2003). What do readers need to learn in order to process coherence relations in narrative and expository text. In A. P. Sweet and C. E. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp.82-98). New York: Guilford Publications.

Hu, X., Cai, Z., Franceschetti, D., Penumatsa, P., Graesser, A. C., Louwerse, M. M., McNamara, D. S., & TRG (2003). LSA: The first dimension and dimensional weighting. In R. Alterman & D. Hirsh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1-6). Boston, MA: Cognitive Science Society. [PDF]

Hu, X., Cai, Z., Graesser, A. C., Louwerse, M. M., Penumatsa, P., Olney, A., & the Tutoring Research Group (2003). An improved LSA algorithm to evaluate student contributions in tutoring dialogue. In G. Gottlob & T. Walsh (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp.1489-1491). San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.

Louwerse, M. M., & Hite Mitchell, H. (2003). Towards a taxonomy of a set of discourse markers in dialog: A theoretical and computational linguistic account. Discourse Processes, 35, 199-239. [PDF]

Bruss, M., Albers, M. J., & McNamara, D.S. (2004). Changes in scientific articles over two hundred years: A Coh-Metrix analysis. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International Conference on Design of Communication: the Engineering of Quality Documentation (pp. 104-109). New York: ACM Press.

Cai, Z., McNamara, D.S., Louwerse, M., Hu, X., Rowe, M. & Graesser, A.C. (2004). NLS: Non-latent similarity algorithm. In K. Forbus, D. Gentner, T. Regier (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 180-185). Nahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. [PDF]

Dufty, D. F., McNamara, D., Louwerse, M., Cai, Z., Graesser, A. C. (2004). Automated evaluation of aspects of document quality. Proceedings of the 22nd annual international conference on Documentation. [PDF]

Graesser, A., McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M., & Cai, Z. (2004). Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 193-202. [PDF]

Louwerse M. M. (2004a). Un modelo conciso de cohesion en el texto y coherencia en la comprehension [A concise model of cohesion in text and coherence in comprehension]. Revista Signos, 37, 41-58.

Louwerse M. M. (2004b). Semantic variation in idiolect and sociolect: Corpus linguistic evidence from literary texts. Computers and the Humanities, 38, 207-221.

Louwerse, M. M., McCarthy, P. M., McNamara, D. S., & Graesser, A. C. (2004). Variation in language and cohesion across written and spoken registers. In K. Forbus, D. Gentner, T. Regier (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 843-848). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. [PDF]

Louwerse, M. M., & Kuiken, D. (2004). The effects of personal involvement in narrative discourse. Discourse Processes, 38, 169-172. [PDF]

McNamara, D. S., Floyd, R. G., Best, R., & Louwerse, M. (2004). World knowledge driving young readers' comprehension difficulties. In Y. B. Yasmin, W. A., Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. S. Nixon, F. Herrera (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixth international conference of the learning sciences: Embracing diversity in the learning sciences (pp. 326-333). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Ventura, M. J., Hu, X., Graesser, A. C., Louwerse, M. M., & Olney, A. (2004). The context dependent sentence abstraction model. In K. D. Forbus, D. Gentner, & T. Regier (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1387-1392). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Best, R M., Rowe, M. P., Ozuru, Y., & McNamara, D. S. (2005). Deep-level comprehension of science texts: The role of the reader and the text. Topics in Language Disorders, 25, 65-83.

Graesser, A.C., Hu, X., & McNamara,D.S. (2005). Computerized learning environments that incoporate research in discourse psychology, cognitive science, and computational linguistics. In A.F. Healy (Ed.), Experimental Cognitive Psychology and its Applications: Festschrift in Honor of Lyle Bourne, Walter Kintsch, and Thomas Landauer (pp. 183-194). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. [DOC]

Graesser, A.C., & Petschonek, S. (2005). Automated systems that analyze text and discourse: QUAID, Coh-Metrix, and AutoTutor. In W. R. Lenderking and D. Revicki (Eds.), Advancing health outcomes research methods and clinical applications. McLean, VA: Degnon Associates. [DOC]

Hempelmann, C.F., Dufty, D., McCarthy, P., Graesser, A.C., Cai, Z., & McNamara, D.S. (2005). Using LSA to automatically identify givenness and newness of noun-phrases in written discourse. In B. Bara (Ed.), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meetings of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Hempelmann, C. F., Rus, V., Graesser, A. C., & McNamara, D.S. (2005). Evaluating state-of-the-art treebank-style parsers for Coh-Metrix and other learning technology environments. Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Building Educational Applications using Natural Language Processing and Computational Linguistics (pp. 69-76). New Brunswick, NJ: ACL.

Louwerse, M. M., & Graesser, A. C. (2005). Coherence in discourse. In P. Strazny (ed.), Encyclopedia of linguistics. Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn.

Louwerse, M. M., & Ventura, M. (2005). How children learn the meaning of words and how computers do it (too). Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14, 301-309.

Louwerse, M. M., Cai, Z., Hu, X., Ventura, M., & Jeuniaux, P. (2005). The embodiment of amodal symbolic knowledge representations. In Proceedings of the 18th International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society (FLAIRS).

Louwerse, M. M., Graesser, A. C., Lu, S., & Mitchell, H. H. (2005). Social cues in animated conversational agents. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1-12.

McCarthy, P. M. (2005). An assessment of the range and usefulness of lexical diversity measures and the potential of the measure of textual, lexical diversity (MTLD) [Microfiche]. Doctoral dissertation, University of Memphis. [DOC]

Rus, V., & Hempelmann, C. (2005), Across-genres an empirical evaluation of state-of-the-art, Treebank-style Parsers. International Journal of Archives of Control Sciences, October.

Bell, C.M., McCarthy, P.M., & McNamara, D.S., (2006, July). Variations in language use across gender: Biological versus sociological theories. Poster to be presented at the 16th Annual Meeting of the Society for Text and Discourse, Minneapolis, MN.

Bell, C.M., McCarthy, P.M., & McNamara, D.S., (2006). Variations in language use across gender: Biological versus sociological theories. In R. Sun & N. Miyake(Eds), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Scociety (pp. 1009). Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum.

Briner, S.W., McCarthy, P.M., McNamara, D.S. (2006). Automating text propositionalization: An assessment of AutoProp. In R. Sun & N. Miyake(Eds), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Scociety (pp. 2449). Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum.

Crossley, S.A., McCarthy, P.M., Lewis, G.A., Dufty, D.F., Louwerse, M., & McNamara, D.S.(2006). Detecting manipulated second language learning texts. In R. Sun & N. Miyake(Eds), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Scociety (pp. 2463). Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum.

Dempsey, K.B., McCarthy, P.M., & McNamara, D.S., (2006). Identifying text genres using phrasal verbs. In R. Sun & N. Miyake(Eds), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Scociety (pp. 2470). Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum.

Dufty, D.F., Graesser, A.C., Louwerse, M., & McNamara, D.S., (2006). Is it just readability, or does cohesion play a role? In R. Sun & N. Miyake(Eds), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Scociety (pp. 1251). Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum.

Duran, N.D., & Lightman, E.J. (2006). An empirical study of cohesion as a predictor of gender differences between Venusians and Martians. Presented at the Southeastern Conference on Linguistics (SECOL LXXIII), Auburn, AL.

Duran, N., McCarthy, P.M., Graesser, A.C., & McNamara, D.S., (2006). Using Coh-Metrix temporal indices to predict psychological measures of time. In R. Sun & N. Miyake(Eds), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Scociety (pp. 190). Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum.

Duran, N.D., & McNamara, D.S. (2006, July). It's about time: Discriminating differences in temporality between genres. Poster to be presented at the 16th Annual Meeting of the Society for Text and Discourse, Minneapolis, MN.

Graesser, A.C. (2006). Views from a cognitive scientist: Cognitive representations underlying discourse are sometimes social. Discourse Studies, 8, 59-66. [PDF]

Hall, C., Lewis, G.A., McCarthy, P.M., Lee, D.S. & McNamara, D.S(2006). Using Coh-Metrix to assess differences between American and English/Welsh. In R. Sun & N. Miyake(Eds), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Scociety (pp. 2498). Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum.

Lightman, E.J., McCarthy, P.M., Dufty, D.F., & McNamara, D.S. (2006, July). Using Coh-Metrix to assess the structural organization of narratives. Paper to be presented at the Society for Text and Discourse conference, Minneapolis, MN. [PDF]

Louwerse, M. M., Cai, Z., Hu, X., Ventura, M., & Jeuniaux, P. (2006). Cognitively inspired natural-language based knowledge representations: Further explorations of Latent Semantic Analysis. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Tools.

McCarthy, P.M., Lewis, G.A., Dufty, D.F., & McNamara, D.S. (2006). Analyzing writing styles with Coh-Metrix. In Proceedings of the Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society International Conference (FLAIRS), Melbourne, Florida(pp. 764).

McCarthy, P.M., Lightman, E.J., Dufty, D.F., & McNamara, D.S.(2006). Using Coh-Metrix to assess distributions of cohesion and difficulty in high-school textbooks. In R. Sun & N. Miyake(Eds), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Scociety (pp. 190). Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum.

McCarthy, P.M., Graesser, A.C., & McNamara, D.S. (2006, July). Distinguishing genre using Coh-Metrix indices of cohesion. Paper to be presented at the Society for Text and Discourse conference, Minneapolis, MN.

McNamara, D.S., Ozuru, Y., Graesser, A.C., & Louwerse, M. (2006) Validating Coh-Metrix. In R. Sun & N. Miyake(Eds), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Scociety (pp. 573). Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum.

O'Reilly, T., Taylor, R.S., & McNamara, D.S. (2006). Classroom based reading strategy training: Self-explanation vs. reading control. In R. Sun & N. Miyake(Eds), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Scociety (pp. 1887). Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum.

O'Reilly, T., Taylor, R. S., Duran, N., & McNamara, D. S. (2006, July). Beyond the science domain: The transfer of reading strategies to non-expository text. Paper presented at the Society for Text and Discourse conference, Minneapolis, MN.

Risser, M.R., Scerbo, M.W., Baldwin, C.L., & McNamara, D.S. (2006). Interference timing and acknowledgement response with voice and datalink ATC commands. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50th Annual Meeting, San Francisco. CA.

Rus, V., Hempelmann, C., Graesser, A.C., McNamara, D.S., (2006). Evaluating State-of-the-Art Treebank-style Parsers for Coh-Metrix and Other Learning Technology Environments (2006). Natural Language Engineering (12), 1-14, Cambridge University Press.

Taylor, R.S., O'Reilly, T., Rowe, M., & McNamara, D.S. (2006). Improving understanding of science texts: iSTART strategy training vs. web design control task. In R. Sun & N. Miyake(Eds), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Scociety (pp. 2234). Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum.

Taylor, R., OI'Reilly, T., Sinclair, G., & McNamara, D.S. (2006). Enhancing learning of expository science texts in a remedial reading classroom via iSTART. In Proceedings of the International Conference of Learning Sciences (pp. 765-770).

Taylor, R. S., & McNamara, D. S. (2006, July). Interest in the domain of science: Impact on expository science text self-explanation quality. Paper to be presented at the Society for Text and Discourse conference, Minneapolis, MN.

Crossley, S.A., Louwerse, M.M., McCarthy, P.M. & McNamara, D.S. (forthcoming 2007). A linguistic analysis of simplified and authentic texts. Modern Language Journal, 91, (2).

Graesser, A.C. (in press). An introduction to strategic reading comprehension. In D.S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Graesser, A. C., Louwerse, M. M., McNamara, D., Olney, A., Cai, Z., & Mitchell, H. (in press). Inference generation and cohesion in the construction of situation models: Some connections with computational linguistics. In F. Schmalhofer & C. Perfetti (Eds.), Higher level language processes in the brain: Inferences and comprehension processes. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Hempelmann, C.F., Rus, V., Graesser, A.C., & McNamara, D.D. (in press). Evaluating the state-of-the-art Treebank-style parsers for Coh-Metrix and other learning technology environments. Natural Language Engineering.

Hu, X., Cai, Z., Wiemer-Hasting, P., Graesser, A., & McNamara, D. S. (in press). Strengths, limitations, and extensions of LSA. In T. Landauer, D. S. McNamara, S. Dennis, & W. Kintsch (Eds.), LSA: A road to meaning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Louwerse, M.M. (in press). Iconicity in amodal symbolic representations. In T. Landauer, D. McNamara, S. Dennis & W. Kintsch (Eds.). LSA: A road to meaning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Louwerse, M. M., & Van Peer, W. (in press). Thematics. In E.K. Brown (Ed.). The encyclopedia of language and linguistics. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Louwerse, M. M., & Graesser, A. C. (in press). Macrostructures. In E. K. Brown (Ed.). The encyclopedia of language and linguistics. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

McCarthy, P.M., Briner, S.W., Rus, V., & McNamara, D.S. (in press). Textual Signatures: Identifying text-types using Latent Semantic Analayis to measure the cohesion of text structures. In: A. Kao, & S. Poteet (Eds.). Natural Language Processing and Text Mining. London: Springer-Verlag UK.

McNamara, D. S., Cai, Z., & Louwerse, M. M. (in press). Comparing latent and non-latent measures of cohesion. In T. Landauer, D.S., McNamara, S. Dennis, & W. Kintsch (Eds.), LSA: A Road to Meaning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. [DOC]

McNamara, D. S., de Vega, M., & O’Reilly, T. (in press). Comprehension skill, inference making, and the role of knowledge. In F. Schmalhofer & C.A. Perfetti (Eds.), Higher level language processes in the brain: Inference and comprehension processes. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

McNamara, D.S., & O’Reilly, T. (in press). Theories of comprehension skill: Knowledge and strategies versus capacity and suppression. In F. Columbus (Ed.), Progress in Experimental Psychology Research. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. [DOC]

O’Reilly, T., & McNamara, D.S. (in press). Good texts can be better for skilled comprehenders. Discourse Processes.

Sanford, A.J., & Graesser, A.C. (in press). Introduction: Shallow processing and underspecification. Discourse Processes.

VanderVeen, A., Huff, K., Gierl, M., McNamara, D.S., Louwerse, M., & Graesser, A.C. (in press). Developing and validating instructionally relevant reading competency profiles measured by the critical reading sections of the SAT. In D.S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

VanLehn, K., Graesser, A.C., Jackson, G.T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., & Rose, C.P. (in press). When are tutorial dialogues more effective than reading? Cognitive Science.