三、五年级儿童阅读理解监控能力的发展及其调节因素

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2026.0853

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

结合眼动技术和不一致觉察范式, 本研究探讨了三、五年级儿童阅读理解监控能力的发展, 以及文本相关性、词汇知识和语素意识在其中的调节作用。结果发现：1)三、五年级儿童均能有效监控文本内容, 表现为不一致条件下的凝视时间、第二次阅读时间和回视路径时间均显著长于一致条件; 2)文本相关性未能调节理解监控过程, 但相关的文本内容提升了三年级儿童的阅读效率; 3)词汇知识能够调节儿童的理解监控, 词汇知识丰富的儿童对不一致信息的修复速度更快。语素意识虽未直接发挥作用, 但可以通过词汇知识间接影响理解监控能力。研究结果表明, 三年级儿童已表现出一定的理解监控能力, 且这种能力的提高与词汇知识和语素意识密切相关。

关键词: 理解监控, 词汇知识, 语素意识, 语义相关

Abstract:

Comprehension monitoring refers to the metacognitive process whereby readers detect a mismatch between their current situation model and new information encountered in the text (awareness) and repair this mismatch by reconstructing the situation model. Previous research has shown that comprehension monitoring plays a critical role in reading, as it helps children focus on relevant information. However, deficits in word recognition and decoding can also lead to reading difficulties and are closely related to cognitive abilities. At present, there is relatively little research on developmental patterns of comprehension monitoring across grade levels, and studies on how cognitive abilities modulate children’s comprehension monitoring have mainly focused on second language learners or children with special educational needs. Drawing on eye-tracking methodology and employing an inconsistency detection paradigm, the present study investigates how children monitor inconsistencies and related information in texts during reading, and examines developmental differences and the moderating roles of relevant cognitive abilities. Two studies were conducted. Study 1 adopted a 2 (Grade: third vs. fifth) × 2 (Semantic consistency: consistent vs. inconsistent) × 2 (Semantic relatedness: related vs. unrelated) three-factor mixed experimental design, with semantic consistency and semantic relatedness as within-subjects variables and grade as a between-subjects variable. On the basis of the preceding analyses, we additionally examined whether morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge moderated the relations involving comprehension monitoring. We also conducted path analyses to clarify how morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge exert their effects on comprehension monitoring. Participants were required to read the experimental materials and complete comprehension judgment tasks. The results showed that (1) both third- and fifth-grade children effectively monitored textual information, as reflected by significantly longer Gaze duration, Second reading time, and Regression-path duration in the inconsistent than in the consistent condition; (2) text relatedness did not modulate the comprehension monitoring process, but related text information enhanced reading efficiency among third graders; and (3) vocabulary knowledge moderated children’s comprehension monitoring, such that children with richer vocabulary knowledge repaired inconsistencies more rapidly. Although morphological awareness did not exert a direct effect, it influenced comprehension monitoring indirectly through vocabulary knowledge. These findings indicate that third-grade children already exhibit a certain level of comprehension monitoring ability, and that improvements in this ability are closely associated with vocabulary knowledge and morphological awareness.

Key words: comprehension monitoring, vocabulary knowledge, morphemic awareness, semantic relevance

中图分类号:

B842
B844

姜勃帆, 陈启杨, 崔楠楠, 吴岩. (2026). 三、五年级儿童阅读理解监控能力的发展及其调节因素. 心理学报, 58(5), 853-865.

JIANG Bofan, CHEN Qiyang, CUI Nannan, WU Yan. (2026). The development of reading comprehension monitoring ability and its moderating factors among third and fifth grade children. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 58(5), 853-865.

图/表 7

参考文献 63

[1]	Abdel-Khalek, A. M. (2005). Reliability and factorial validity of the standard progressive matrices among Kuwaiti children ages 8 to 15 years. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 101(2), 409-412 pmid: 16383072
[2]	Bai, X., Yan, G., Zang, C., Liversedge, S. P., & Rayner, K. (2008). Reading spaced and unspaced Chinese text: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34(5), 1277-1287. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.34.5.1277 URL
[3]	Baker, L. (1984). Spontaneous versus instructed use of multiple standards for evaluating comprehension: Effects of age, reading proficiency, and type of standard. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 38(2), 289-311. doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(84)90127-9 URL
[4]	Baker,, L. (1985). How do we know when we don’t understand? Standards for evaluating text comprehension. In D. Forrest-Pressley, G. MacKinnon, & T. Waller (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition and human performance (pp. 155-205). New York, NY: Academic.
[5]	Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255-278 doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001 URL
[6]	Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2014). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1-48.
[7]	Bicknell, K., & Levy, R. (2011). Why readers regress to previous words: A statistical analysis. Paper presented at the 33rd annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Boston, MA.
[8]	Blythe, H., I., & Joseph, H. S. S. L. (2011). Children’s eye-movements during reading. In S.P. Liversedge, I. Gilchrist & S. Everling (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of eye-movements. (pp.645-651). Oxford University Press.
[9]	Brown, V. A. (2021). An introduction to linear mixed-effects modeling in R. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 4(1), 1-19.
[10]	Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (2006). Profiles of children with specific reading comprehension difficulties. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 683-696. doi: 10.1348/000709905X67610 URL
[11]	Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children’s reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 31-42. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.31 URL
[12]	Camblin, C. C., Gordon, P. C., & Swaab, T. Y. (2007). The interplay of discourse congruence and lexical association during sentence processing: Evidence from ERPs and eye tracking. Journal of Memory and Language, 56(1), 103-128. pmid: 17218992
[13]	Cartwright, K. B., Lee, S. A., Taboada Barber, A., DeWyngaert, L. U., Lane, A. B., & Singleton, T. (2020). Contributions of executive function and cognitive intrinsic motivation to university students’ reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(3), 345-369. doi: 10.1002/rrq.273
[14]	Chen, B. R. (2011). The development of Chinese lexical awareness in primary school children: A study of the characteristics and role in reading comprehension [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Shaanxi Normal University, Xi'an.
	[陈泊蓉. (2011). 小学中高年级儿童汉语语素意识的发展特点及其与阅读理解的关系 (硕士学位论文). 陕西师范大学, 西安. ].
[15]	Chen, X., Hao, M. L., Geva, E., Zhu, J., & Shu, H. (2009). The role of compound awareness in Chinese children's vocabulary acquisition and character reading. Reading & Writing, 22, 615-631.
[16]	Cheng, Y., Zhang, J., Li, H., Wu, X., Liu, H., Dong, Q., ... Sun, P. (2017). Growth of compounding awareness predicts reading comprehension in young Chinese students: A longitudinal study from Grade 1 to Grade 2. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(1), 91-104. doi: 10.1002/rrq.2017.52.issue-1 URL
[17]	Connor, C. M., Radach, R., Vorstius, C., Day, S. L., McLean, L., & Morrison, F. J. (2015). Individual differences in fifth graders’ literacy and academic language predict comprehension monitoring development: An eye-movement study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19(2), 114-134. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2014.943905 URL
[18]	Cui, N., Wang, Y., Luo, J., & Wu, Y. (2024). The role of executive functions in 9-to 12-year-old children’s sentence processing: An eye-movement study. Journal of Research in Reading, 47(2), 201-219. doi: 10.1111/jrir.v47.2 URL
[19]	Cutting, L. E., Materek, A., Cole, C., A. S., Levine, T. M., & Mahone, E. M. (2009). Effects of fluency, oral language, and executive function on reading comprehension performance. Annals of Dyslexia, 59(1), 34-54. doi: 10.1007/s11881-009-0022-0 pmid: 19396550
[20]	Cutting, L. E., & Scarborough, H. S. (2006). Prediction of reading comprehension: Relative contributions of word recognition, language proficiency, and other cognitive skills can depend on how comprehension is measured. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3), 277-299 doi: 10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_5 URL
[21]	Del Giudice, M. (2014). Middle childhood: An evolutionary-developmental synthesis. Child Development Perspectives, 8(4), 193-200. doi: 10.1111/cdep.12084 URL
[22]	Ehri, L. C. (2014). Orthographic mapping in the acquisition of sight word reading, spelling memory, and vocabulary learning. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 5-21. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2013.819356 URL
[23]	Eilers, S., Tiffin-Richards, S. P., & Schroeder, S. (2018). Individual differences in children’s pronoun processing during reading: Detection of incongruence is associated with higher reading fluency and more regressions. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 173, 250-267. doi: S0022-0965(17)30477-0 pmid: 29753908
[24]	Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using GPower 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods*, 41(4), 1149-1160. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149 pmid: 19897823
[25]	Florit, E., De Carli, P., Rodà, A., Cain, K., & Mason, L. (2025). Reading from paper, computers, and tablets in the first grade: The role of comprehension monitoring. Computers & Education Open, 8, Article 100243.
[26]	Fong, Y. C., & Ho, C. S. H. (2017). What are the contributing cognitive linguistic skills for early Chinese listening comprehension? Learning and Individual Differences, 59, 78-85. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2017.08.001 URL
[27]	Garner, R. (1980). Monitoring of understanding: An investigation of good and poor readers’ awareness of induced miscomprehension of text. Journal of Reading Behavior, 12(1), 55-64. doi: 10.1080/10862968009547352 URL
[28]	Gombert, J. E. (1992). Metalinguistic development (pp. 176-178). University of ChicagoPress. (Original work published 1990).
[29]	Hessel, A. K., Nation, K., & Murphy, V. A. (2021). Comprehension monitoring during reading: An eye-tracking study with children learning English as an additional language. Scientific Studies of Reading, 25(2), 159-178. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2020.1740227 URL
[30]	Hudson, N, Scheff, J, Tarsha, M, Cutting, L. E. (2016). Reading comprehension and executive function neurobiological findings. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 42(2), 23-29.
[31]	Inhoff, A. W., & Liu, W. (1998). The perceptual span and oculomotor activity during the reading of Chinese sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(1), 20-34. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.24.1.20 URL
[32]	Jin, Z., & Song, Y. (2022). The influence of morphological awareness, vocabulary knowledge, and syntactic knowledge on Korean-Chinese children’s Chinese reading comprehension. Chinese Language Education and Research, 38, 21-32. doi: 10.24285/CLER.2022.11.38.21 URL
[33]	Kendeou, P., Papadopoulos, T. C., & Spanoudis, G. (2012). Processing demands of reading comprehension tests in young readers. Learning and Instruction, 22(5), 354-367. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.02.001 URL
[34]	Kendeou, P., Van Den Broek, P., Helder, A., & Karlsson, J. (2014). A cognitive view of reading comprehension: Implications for reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(1), 10-16.
[35]	Kendeou, P., van den Broek, P., White, M. J., & Lynch, J. S. (2009). Predicting reading comprehension in early elementary school: The independent contributions of oral language and decoding skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 765-778. doi: 10.1037/a0015956 URL
[36]	Kieffer, M. J., Vukovic, R. K., & Berry, D. (2013). Roles of attention shifting and inhibitory control in fourth-grade reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(4), 333-348. doi: 10.1002/rrq.54 URL
[37]	Kim, Y.-S., Wagner, R. K., & Lopez, D. (2012). Developmental relations between reading fluency and reading comprehension: A longitudinal study from Grade 1 to Grade 2. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 113(1), 93-111. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2012.03.002 URL
[38]	Kim, Y.-S. G. (2017). Why the simple view of reading is not simplistic: Unpacking Component Skills of reading using a direct and indirect effect model of reading (DIER). Scientific Studies of Reading, 21(4), 310-333. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2017.1291643 URL
[39]	Kim, Y.-S. G. (2019). Toward integrative reading science: The direct and indirect effects model of reading (DIER). Journal of Learning Disabilities, 53(6), 469-491. doi: 10.1177/0022219420908239 URL
[40]	Kim, Y.-S. G., Vorstius, C., & Radach, R. (2018). Does online comprehension monitoring make a unique contribution to reading comprehension in beginning readers? Evidence from eye movements. Scientific Studies of Reading, 22(5), 367-383. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2018.1457680 URL
[41]	Kinnunen,, R., & Vauras, M. (2010). Tracking online metacognition:Monitoring and regulating comprehension in reading. In A. Efklides & P. Misailidi (Eds.), Trends and prospects in metacognition research (pp. 209-258). New York, NY: Springer.
[42]	Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163-182. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.95.2.163 pmid: 3375398
[43]	Li, X., Liu, P., & Rayner, K. (2015). Saccade target selection in Chinese reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(2), 524-530. doi: 10.3758/s13423-014-0693-3 URL
[44]	Liu, Y., & Liu, D. (2020). Morphological awareness and orthographic awareness link Chinese writing to reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 33(7), 1701-1720. doi: 10.1007/s11145-019-10009-0
[45]	Markman, E. M. (1979). Realizing that you don’t understand: Elementary school children’s awareness of inconsistencies. Child Development, 50(3), 643-655. pmid: 498843
[46]	McBride-Chang, C., Wagner, R. K., Muse, A., Chow, B. W.-Y., & Shu, H. (2005). The role of morphological awareness in children’s vocabulary acquisition in English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26(3), 415-436. doi: 10.1017/S014271640505023X URL
[47]	McNamara, D. S. (2001). Reading both high-coherence and low-coherence texts: Effects of text sequence and prior knowledge. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55(1), 51-62. doi: 10.1037/h0087352 URL
[48]	McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N. B., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14(1), 1-43. doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci1401_1 URL
[49]	Moats, L.C. (2005). How spelling supports reading. American Educator, 29, 12-43.
[50]	Oakhill, J., Hartt, J., & Samols, D. (2005). Levels of comprehension monitoring and working memory in good and poor comprehenders. Reading and Writing, 18(7-9), 657-686. doi: 10.1007/s11145-005-3355-z URL
[51]	Qiu, C., Hatton, R., & Hou, M. (2020). Variations in Raven’s Progressive Matrices scores among Chinese children and adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 164, 110064. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2020.110064 URL
[52]	Quinn, J. M., Wagner, R. K., Petscher, Y., & Lopez, D. (2015). Developmental relations between vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension: A latent change score modeling study. Child Development, 86(1), 159-175. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12292 pmid: 25201552
[53]	Rapp, D. N., & Van Den Broek, P. (2005). Dynamic text comprehension: An integrative view of reading. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(5), 276-279. doi: 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00380.x URL
[54]	Raven, J. C. (1960). Guide to the standard progressive matrices: Sets A, B, C, D and E. H.K. Lewis.
[55]	Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372-422. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372 pmid: 9849112
[56]	Rayner, K., Pollatsek, S., Ashby, J., & Clifton, C. (2012). Psychology of reading (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
[57]	Rayner, K., & Schotter, E. R. (2014). Semantic preview benefit in reading English: The effect of initial letter capitalization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(6), 1617-1628. doi: 10.1037/a0036763 URL
[58]	Vorstius, C., Radach, R., Mayer, M., & Lonigan, C. (2013). Monitoring local comprehension monitoring in sentence reading. School Psychology Review, 42(2), 191-206. doi: 10.1080/02796015.2013.12087484 URL
[59]	Wang, X, Tao, B. (1996). The scale and assessment of vocabulary for primary school. Shanghai Educational Press. (in Chinese).
	[王孝玲, 陶保平. (1996). 小学生识字量测试题库及评价量表. 上海教育出版社.]
[60]	Warren, T., & McConnell, K. (2007). Investigating effects of selectional restriction violations and plausibility violation severity on eye-movements in reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(4), 770-775. doi: 10.3758/BF03196835 URL
[61]	Zargar, E., Adams, A. M., & Connor, M. D. (2019). The relations between children's comprehension monitoring and their reading comprehension and vocabulary knowledge: an eye-movement study. Reading and Writing, 33(3), 511-545 doi: 10.1007/s11145-019-09966-3
[62]	Zhang, Y., Dong, Q., Shu, H., & Wu, Y. (2017). The roles of phonological awareness, naming speed, and morphological awareness in Chinese reading development. Psychological Development and Education, 33(4), 401-409.
[63]	Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123(2), 162-185. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.123.2.162 pmid: 9522683

实验条件	例句	整句合理性		句子理解难度
实验条件	例句	教师	儿童	三年级	五年级
一致相关	到家后妈妈把新买的葡萄放在/果盘上了。	3.53(0.51)	3.20(0.35)	3.45(0.28)	3.52(0.30)
不一致相关	到家后妈妈把新买的果盘放在/葡萄上了。	1.34(0.27)	1.60(0.38)	2.55(0.50)	2.41(0.50)
一致不相关	到家后妈妈把新买的葡萄放在/纸巾上了。	3.08(0.56)	3.07(0.45)	3.26(0.29)	3.32(0.36)
不一致不相关	到家后妈妈把新买的纸巾放在/葡萄上了。	1.29(0.27)	1.58(0.33)	2.53(0.50)	2.33(0.58)

实验条件	例句	整句合理性		句子理解难度
实验条件	例句	教师	儿童	三年级	五年级
一致相关	到家后妈妈把新买的葡萄放在/果盘上了。	3.53(0.51)	3.20(0.35)	3.45(0.28)	3.52(0.30)
不一致相关	到家后妈妈把新买的果盘放在/葡萄上了。	1.34(0.27)	1.60(0.38)	2.55(0.50)	2.41(0.50)
一致不相关	到家后妈妈把新买的葡萄放在/纸巾上了。	3.08(0.56)	3.07(0.45)	3.26(0.29)	3.32(0.36)
不一致不相关	到家后妈妈把新买的纸巾放在/葡萄上了。	1.29(0.27)	1.58(0.33)	2.53(0.50)	2.33(0.58)

词语类型	样例	笔画	平均字频	词频	熟悉度	相关程度
核心词	葡萄	17.63(3.96)	4.59(0.73)	3.13(0.71)	1.08(0.31)	——
语义相关词	果盘	16.08(4.27)	4.81(0.57)	2.91(0.70)	1.05(0.24)	3.32(1.05)
语义无关词	纸巾	16.04(4.09)	4.69(0.71)	3.02(0.80)	1.03(0.18)	2.14(1.26)

词语类型	样例	笔画	平均字频	词频	熟悉度	相关程度
核心词	葡萄	17.63(3.96)	4.59(0.73)	3.13(0.71)	1.08(0.31)	——
语义相关词	果盘	16.08(4.27)	4.81(0.57)	2.91(0.70)	1.05(0.24)	3.32(1.05)
语义无关词	纸巾	16.04(4.09)	4.69(0.71)	3.02(0.80)	1.03(0.18)	2.14(1.26)

条件	三年级			五年级
条件	GD	SRT	RPD	GD	SRT	RPD
一致相关	387(231)	470(311)	856(569)	365(198)	427(292)	854(581)
一致不相关	397(240)	482(314)	892(591)	378(226)	452(301)	842(565)
不一致相关	403(240)	554(358)	1066(713)	398(216)	454(285)	956(602)
不一致不相关	428(241)	539(338)	1149(714)	379(224)	463(286)	942(576)