本研究的主要目在探討「推論性問題引導課程」對國小四年級學童在故事體文章上的推論理解能力、自發性產出的推論數量與閱讀理解能力上的影響。研究方法採準實驗設計中的不等組前後測設計，以基隆市一所國小四年級71名學童為對象，實驗組36名學生，控制組35名學生；實驗組接受為期九週，每週兩節課（80分鐘）的「推論性問題引導課程方案」，控制組則未接受實驗處理。
本研究在推論理解能力與推論數量的分析部分，是以「國小學童推論理解測驗」與「放聲思考測驗」為評量工具；在閱讀理解能力部分，則以「故事重述測驗」為評量工具，並於實驗課程結束進行後測，所得資料以獨立樣本單因子共變數分析進行統計處理。同時也分析「單元回饋表」和「課程總回饋表」等實驗組學生回饋資料，以瞭解本實驗教學之成效。
研究結果顯示：
一、就推論理解能力而言：
1.推論性問題引導課程有助於提升學童在「國小學童推論理解測驗」的推論理解表現，在「指稱」、「精緻化」和「類比」層面具顯著提升效果，但在「因果關係」和「摘取大意」層面則無顯著提升效果。
2.推論性問題引導課程有助於提升學童在「放聲思考測驗」上自發性產出的推論數量，在「指稱」和「摘取大意」層面具顯著提升效果，但在「因果關係」、「精緻化」和「類比」等層面則無顯著提升效果。
二、就閱讀理解能力而言，推論性問題引導課程有助於提升學童的閱讀理解能力。
三、從實驗組學生的回饋資料中發現，超過八以上的學生表示喜歡上推論性問題引導課程，也認為整體課程能增進他們在推論理解與閱讀理解能力上的表現。
最後研究者針對研究結果加以討論，並提出具體建議以作為「推論性問題引導課程」在國小教學應用及未來研究上之參考。

The main purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of “Inferential question discussion program” on narrative inferential comprehension ability, the quantity of spontaneous inferences and reading comprehension ability of fourth grade students. Quasi-experiment design was adopted to the present study. The participants were 71 fourth grade students selected from two classes in an elementary school in Keelung County. There were 36 students in the experimental group and 35 students in the control group. Students in the experimental group received “Inferential question discussion program” for 9 weeks, 2 sections (i.e. 80 mins) per week, while those in the control group did not receive any experimental treatment.
Three quantitative instruments were used in this study. The Inferential Comprehension Test for Elementary School Students and the Think-Aloud Test were utilized to examine the inferential comprehension effects. The Story Retell Test was to examine the reading comprehension effect. The collected data were analyzed by one-way ANCOVA. The feedback provided by students in the experimental group were also analyzed. The results are presented as follows.
First, with regard to the ability of inferential comprehension:
(1)“Inferential question discussion program” significantly improved students’ inferential comprehension performance on the aspects of “referential inference,” “elaboration,” and “analogy” in the Inferential Comprehension Test for Elementary School Students, but did not significantly improve the aspects of “causal inference,” and “summarization”.
(2) Regarding the quantity of spontaneous inferences, “Inferential question discussion program” could significantly increase students’ spontaneous inferences on the aspects of “referential inference,” and “summarization” in the Think-Aloud Test, but could not significantly improve the performance on the aspects of “causal inference,” “elaboration,” and “analogy”.
Second, as for the ability of reading comprehension, “Inferential question discussion program” effectively improved students’ reading comprehension ability.
Third, the students’ feedback showed that more than 80% of students in experimental group enjoyed “Inferential question discussion program” and benefited from this program on improving inferential comprehension and reading comprehension.
All results are discussed and some suggestions for instructional application and future researches are provided as well.

一、中文部分
王仁宏（2004）：後設認知策略對國小補校成人學生閱讀理解成效影響之研究。國立中正大學成人及繼續教育研究所碩士論文。
王瓊珠（1991）：國小六年級閱讀障礙兒童與普通兒童閱讀認知能力之比較研究。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
何東墀、胡永崇（1996）：後設認知策略教學對國小閱讀障礙學童閱讀理解成效之研究。特殊教育學報，11期，173-210頁。
吳和堂（1995）：有聲思考法在教育上的應用。研習資訊，12卷，3期，14-17頁。
吳訓生（2000）：國小低閱讀能力學生閱讀理解策略教學效果之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所博士論文。
李玉貴（1997）：國小學童線上閱讀故事體文章之推論類別分析研究。臺北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
李玉貴（2001）：閱讀推論類型研究。臺北市立教育大學主辦「閱讀歷程與閱讀教學研討會」會議資料（1-26頁）。
李慧慧（2006）：國小閱讀理解困難學生先備知識、詞彙量、工作記憶、推論能力與閱讀理解之關係。國立台南大學特殊教育學系碩士班碩士論文。
汪榮才（1999）：國民小學自然科後設認知閱讀策略教學成效之研究。國民教育研究集刊，5期，1-64頁。
周玉婷（2007）：不同閱讀策略應用於網路資源教學對於國小高年級學童學習成效之研究。國立臺南大學教育學習課程與教學碩士班碩士論文。
林宜真（1998）：閱讀障礙學生與普通學生閱讀理解方式之比較研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
林玟慧（1995）：閱讀理解策略教學對國中閱讀障礙學生閱讀效果之研究。特殊教育研究學刊，12期， 235-259頁。
林建平（1994）：整合學習策略與動機的訓練方案對國小閱讀理解困難兒童的輔導效果。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所博士論文。
林建平（1997）：學習輔導－理論與實務。台北：五南。
林清山（1988）：多變項分析統計法。台北：東華。
林清山（1992）：心理與教育統計學。台北：東華。
林清山譯（1997）：教育心理學－認知取向。台北：遠流。Mayer, R. (1987). Educational psychology: A cognitive approach.
林慧芳（2002）：國小六年級低閱讀能力學生工作記憶與推論能力之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
邱美秀（1995）：高中生閱讀兩難故事的工作記憶因果推論歷程研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學研究所碩士論文。
邱美虹（1994）： 從“自我解釋”所產生的推論探究高中生化學平衡的學習。師大學報， 39期，489-524頁。
柯華葳（1999）：閱讀理解困難篩選測驗。行政院國家科學委員會研究計畫成果報告(編號：NSC84-2421-H-194-001-F5，NSC86-2413-H-194-002-F5)。
柯華葳、游婷雅譯（2001）：踏出閱讀的第一步。台北：信誼。Burns, M. S., Griffin, P., & Snow, E. C., NRC編輯群. Starting out right: A guide to promoting children’s reading success.
范沛瀅（2004）：運用放聲思考法比較國小五年級閱讀理解困難學生與一般學生之推論能力。國立台北師範學院特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
涂金堂（1999）：閱讀理解的推論歷程之研究。教育研究，7期，129-141頁。
張紹勳、林秀娟（2005）：SPSS多變量統計分析=Multivariate date analysis。台中：滄海。
張雅如、蘇宜芬（2004）：國小學童推論理解測驗之編製與研究。行政院國家科學委員會大專學生參與專題研究計畫研究成果報告（編號：NSC92-2815-C-003-025-H）
張瑛玿（1994）：自我發問策略對國小學生的閱讀理解與自我發問能力之影響。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
張寶珠（1994）：後設認知訓練對閱讀理解能力的增進效果。諮商與輔導，100期，35-39頁。
張蘇美（1996）：因果類型之激發方式與文章結構對學童閱讀理解的影響。國立新竹師範學院初等教育研究所碩士論文。
郭靜姿（1993）：閱讀理解訓練方案對於增進閱讀策略運用與後設認知能力之成效研究。教育研究資訊，1期，5卷，26-50頁。
陳沛嵐（2001）：文章中的因果架構對國小四、六年級學生閱讀表徵之影響。國立中正大學教育研究所碩士論文。
陳玟里（2003）：合作學習閱讀理解策略對高職學生閱讀成就與閱讀態度之研究。國立彰化師範大學工業教育學系碩士論文。
陳淑絹（1995）：「指導-合作學習」教學策略增進國小學童閱讀理解能力之實徵研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學研究所博士論文。
曾陳密桃（1990）：國民中小學生的後設認知及其閱讀理解相關研究。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文。
黃嶸生（2002）：整合式閱讀理解策略輔助系統對國小學童閱讀能力和策略運用的效果。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學研究所碩士論文。
黃瓊儀（2003）：不同閱讀理解策略教學對國小閱讀理解障礙學生教學成效之研究。國立台北師範學院特殊教育學系碩士論文。
葉靖雲（1998）。課程本位閱讀理解測驗的效度研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（報告編號：NSC 84- 2421-H-018-002-4401）。
廖晉斌（2004）：國文閱讀理解策略教學對增進國中生閱讀理解能力、閱讀策略運用及學業成就效果之研究。國立彰化師範大學輔導與諮商學系研究所碩士論文。
劉玲吟（1994）：後設認知閱讀策略教學對國中低閱讀能力學生閱讀效果之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
鄭宇樑（1998）：後設認知閱讀教學對國小學生科學文章閱讀理解、閱讀態度及後設認知能力影響之研究。國民教育研究集刊，4期，223-259頁。
鄭春蕓、邱美虹（1994）：閱讀理解的推論形式與研究方法。嘉義師院學報，8期，287-312頁。
錡寶香（2004）：閱讀理解困難學童推論能力之研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育系主辦之「2004年手語暨溝通障礙研討會」宣讀之論文（台北）。
鍾雅婷（2000）： 學習策略教學對國小六年級學童閱讀理解成效之研究。國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
魏靜雯（2004）：心智繪圖與摘要教學對國小五年級學生閱讀理解與摘要能力之影響。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學研究所碩士論文。
蘇宜芬（1991）：後設認知訓練課程對國小低閱讀能力學生的閱讀理解能力與後設認知能力之影響。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
蘇宜芬（2004）：閱讀理解的影響因素及其在教學上的意義。教師天地，129期，21-28頁。
蘇宜芬、林清山（1992）：後設認知訓練課程對國小低閱讀能力學生的閱讀理解能力與後設認知能力之影響。教育心理學報，25期，245-268頁。

二、英文部分
Anderson, R., & Pearson, P. D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 255-291). New York: Longman.
Carr, E., Dewitz, P., & Patberg, J. (1989). Using cloze for inference training with expository text. The reading Teacher, 42(6), 380-385.
Carr, S. C., & Thompson, B. (1996). The effects of prior knowledge and schema activation strategies on the inferential reading comprehension of children with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 19, 48-61.
Chall, J. S. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York: Mc GrawHill.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavior sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Corbett, A. T., & Dosher, B. A. (1978). Instrument inferences in sentence encoding. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 479-491.
Cote, N., & Goldman, S. (1999). Building representations of informational text: Evidence from children’s think-aloud protocols. In H. van Oostendorp & S. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 169-193). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dewitz, P., Carr, E., & Patberg, J. (1987). Effect of inference training on comprehension and comprehension monitoring. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 99-119.
Ehri, L. C. (1982). Learning to read and spell. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association annual meeting, Washington, D. C.
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Finnerty, J. C. P. (1993). Instruction, imagery and inference: The effects of three instructional methods on inferential comprehension of elementary children. Dissertation Abstracts Insternational, 54(09), 43307A. (UMI No. 9402622)
Forster, K. I. (1981). Priming and the effects of sentence and lexical contexts on naming time: Evidence for autonomous lexical processing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 465-495.
Fritschmann, N. S. (2006). The effects of instruction in an inference strategy on the reading comprehension of adolescents with learning disabilities. Dissertation Abstracts Insternational, 67(02). (UMI No. 3207561)
Gagné, E. D. (1985). The cognitive psychology of school learning. Boston: Little, Brown.
Gagné, E. D., Yekovich, C. W., & Yekovich, F. R. (1993). The cognitive psychology of school learning (2nd ed.). New York: Harper Collins College.
Gambrell, L. B., Block, C. C., & Pressley, M. (2002). Improving comprehension instruction: An Urgent priority. In C. C. Block, L. B. Grambrell, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Improving comprehension instruction (pp. 3-16). Ssn Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Garner, R. (1982). Efficient text summarization: Costs and benefits. Journal of Educational Research, 75(5), 275-279.
Garner, R. (1988). Metacognition and reading comprehension (2nd ed.). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Gluckberg, S., Kreuz, R. J., & Rho, S. H. (1986). Context can constrain lexical access: Implications for models of language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12, 323-335.
Graesser, A. C., & Clark, L. F. (1985). Structures and procedures of implicit knowledge. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Graesser, A. C., & Kreuz, R. J. (1993). A theory of inference generation during text comprehension. Discourse Processes, 16, 145-160.
Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inference during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 3, 371-395.
Halldorson, M., & Singer, M. (2002). Inference processes: Integrating relevant knowledge and text Information. Discourse Processes, 34(2), 145-161.
Hansen, J. (1981). An inferential comprehension strategy for use with primary grade children. Reading Teacher, 34(6), 665-69.
Hansen, J., & Pearson, P. D. (1983). An instructional study: Improving the inferential comprehension of good and poor fourth-grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(6), 821-29.
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, 357-374.
Holmes, B. C. (1984). The effect of prior knowledge on the question answering of good and poor readers. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(4), 1-18.
Hunt, J. W. (1987). A comparison of the effects of a teacher-questioning directed reading activity and a prediction-generating directed reading activity on the independent reading comprehension abilities of low-achieving readers. Dissertation Abstracts Insternational, 48(03), 617A. (UMI No. 8713264)
Johnson, R. E. (1970). Recall of prose as a function of the structural importance of the linguistic units. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 12-20.
Keenan, J. M., Golding, J. M., Potts, G. R., Jennings, T. M., & Aman, C. J. (1990). Methodological issues in evaluating the occurrence of inferences. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 25, 295-312
Keenan, J. M., & Kintsch, W. (1974). The identification of explicitly and implicitly presented information. In W. Kintsch (Ed.), The representation of meaning in memory (pp. 153-166). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Keenan, J. M., Potts, G. R., Golding, J. M., & Jennings, T. M. (1990). Which elaborative inferences are drawn during reading? A question of methodologies. In D. A. Balota, G. R. Flores d’Arcais, & K. Rayner (Eds.), Comprehension processes in reading (pp. 377-402). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163-182.
Kintsch, W. (1993). Information accretion and reduction in text processing: Inferences. Discourse Process ,16 , 193-202.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Klare, G. R. (1984). Readability. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 681-744). New York: Longman.
Laing, S. P., & Kamhi, A. G. (2002). The use of think-aloud protocols to compare inferencing abilities in average and below-average readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(5), 436-447.
Leslie, J. L., & Caldwell, J. (1995). Qualitative reading inventory-II (pp. 293-319). New York: Harper Colins College.
Lipson, M. Y. (1982). Learning new information from text: The role of prior knowledge and reading ability. Journal of Reading Behavior, 14, 243-260.
Lipson, M. Y. (1983). The influence of religious affiliation on children’s memory for text information. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 448-457.
Long, D. L., & Bourg, T. (1996). Thinking aloud: Telling a story about a story. Discourse Processes, 21, 329-339.
Long, D. L., Golding, J. M. (1993). Superordinate goal inferences: Are they automatically generated during comprehension? Discourse Process ,16 , 55-73.
Long, D. L., Golding , J. M., & Graesser, A. C. (1992). A test of the on-line status of goal-related inferences. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 634-647.
Long, D. L., Golding, J. M., Graessar, A. C., & Clark, L. F. (1990). Goal, enent, and state inferences: An investigation of inference generation during story comprehension. In A. C. Graesser & G. H. Bower (Eds.), Inferences and text comprehension (pp. 89-102). New York: Academic.
Marr, M. B., & Gormley, K. (1982). Children’s recall of familiar and unfamiliar text. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 89-104.
Martin, V. L., & Pressley, M. (1991). Elaborative-interrogation effects depend on the nature of question. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 113–119.
McDaniel, M. A., & Donnelly, C. M. (1996). Learning with analogy and elaborative interrogation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 508-519.
McGee, A., & Johnson, H. (2003). The Effect of inference training on skilled and less skilled comprehenders. Educational Psychology, 23(1), 49-59.
McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1981). The comprehension processes and memory structures involved in instrumental inference. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 671-682.
McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1986). Inferences about predictable events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition, 12(1), 82-91.
McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1990). Textual inferences: Models and measures. In D. A. Balota, G. R. Flores d’Arcais, & K. Rayner (Eds.), Comprehension processes in reading (pp. 403-421). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Inference During Reading. Psychological Review, 99(3), 440-466.
Mercer, C. D., & Mercer, A. R. (1993). Teaching students with learning problems (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Neal, K. J. S. (1987). Prediction in the reading process: Providing a connection between prior knowledge and comprehension. Dissertation Abstracts Insternational, 49(04), 776A. (UMI No. 8805014)
O’Donnell, M. P. (1992). Becoming a reader: A developmental approach to reading instruction. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Oakhill, J. (1984). Inferential and memory skills in children’s comprehension of stories. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 31-39.
Olson, G. M., Duffy, S. A., & Mack, R. L. (1984). Thinking-out-loud as a method for studying realtime comprehension processes. In D. E. Kieras & M. Just (Eds.), New methods in the study of immediate processes in comprehension. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ozgungor, S., & Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Interaction among elaborative interrogation, knowledge, and interest in the process of constructing knowledge from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 437-443.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-forstering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
Paris, S. G. (1988). Theories and metaphors about learning strategies. In C. E. Weinstein, E. T. Goetz, & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies: Assessment, instruction, and evaluation (pp. 299-321). NY: Academic Press.
Paris, S. G., & Upton, L. R. (1976). Children's memory for inferential relationships in prose. Child Development, 47(3), 660-668.
Payne, B. D., & Manning, B. H. (1992). Basal redaer instruction: Effects of comprehension monitoring training on reading comprehension, strategy use and attitude. Reading Research and Instruction, 32(1), 29-38.
Pearson, P. D., & Hamm, D. N. (2005). The assessment of reading comprehension: A review of practices---past, present, and future. In S. G. Paris & S. A. Stahl (Eds.), Children’s reading comprehension and assessment (pp. 13-69). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pearson, P. D., & Johnson, D. D. (1978). Teaching reading comprehension. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Pinter, K. A. (1985). The effect of text simplification and instructional procedure on the inference generation of fifth grade disabled readers (readability, directed reading-thinking activity (DR-TA), group mapping activity, children’s literature). Dissertation Abstracts Insternational, 46(12), 3668A. (UMI No. 8604346)
Potts, G. R., Keenan, J. M., & Golding, J. M. (1988). Assessing the occurrence of the elaborative inferences: Lexical decision versus naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 399-415.
Pressley , M., & Afflerbach ,P. (1995).Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Associates.
Raphael, T. E. (1983). Development aspects of training students to use information locating strategies for responding to question. (Research series No. 137). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED24152).
Raphael, T. E., & McKinney, J. (1983). An examination of fifth and eighth-grade children’s question-answering behavior: An instructional study in metacognition. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(3), 67-86.
Reutzel, D. R., Camperell, K., & Smith, J. A. (2002). Hitting the wall: Helping struggling readers comprehend. In C. C.Block, L. B. Gambrell, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Improving comprehension instruction (pp. 321-353). San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
Richards, J. C., & Anderson, N. A. (2003). How do you know? A strategy to help emergent readers make inferences. Reading Teacher, 57(3), 290-293.
Rickheit, G., Schnotz, W., & Strohner, H. (1985). The concept of inference in discourse comprehension. In G. Rickheit & H. Strohner (Ed.), Inferences in text processing. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science.
Roger, E. K. (1968). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Rosenshine, B. V. (1986). Synthesis of research on explicit teaching. Educational Leadership, 43(7), 60-69.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1991). Understanding understanding. In W. Kessen, A. Ortony, & F. Craig (Eds.), Memory, thoughts, and emotions: Essays in honor of George Mandler (pp. 257-275). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sims, J. S. (1987). A comparison of the metacognition and comprehension benefits of teacher-led thematic-fantasy play and retelling/discussion with second-graders. Dissertation Abstracts Insternational, 49(03), 426A. (UMI No. 8808606)
Singer, M., & Ferreira, F. (1983). Inferring consequences in story comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 437-448.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Sundbye, N. (1987). Text explicitness and inferential questioning: Effects on story understanding & recall. Recall Research Quarterly, 22, 82-98.
Trabasso, T., & Magliano, J. P. (1996). Conscious understanding during cmprehension. Discourse Processes , 21, 255-287.
Trabasso, T., & Suh, S. (1993). Understanding text: Achieving explanatory coherence through on-line inferences and mental operations in working memory. Discourse Processes ,16 , 3-34.
Trabasso, T., Secco, T., & van den Broek, P. (1984). Causal cohesion and story coherence. In H. Mandl, N. Stein, & T. Trabasso (Eds.), Learning and comprehension of text. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence.
van den Broek, P., Fletcher, C. T., & Risden, K. (1993). Investigation of inference processes in reading: A theoretical and methodological intergration. Discourse Processes, 16, 169-180.
van den Broek, P., & Kremer, K. E. (2000). The mind in action: What it means to comprehension during reading. In B. M. Taylor, M. F. Graves, & P. van den Broek (Eds.), Reading for meaning: Fostering comprehension in the middle grades (pp. 1-31). New York: Teachers College Press.
van den Broek, P., Kremer, K., Lynch, J., Butler, J., & Lorch, E. P. (2005). Assessment of comprehension abilities in young children. In S. G. Paris & S. A. Stahl (Eds.), Children’s reading comprehension and assessment (pp. 107-130). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
van den Broek, P., Lorch, E. P., & Thurlow, R. (1996). Children's and adults' memory for television stories: The role of causal factors, story-grammar categories, and hierarchical level. Child Development, 67, 3010-3028.
van den Broek, P., & Trabasso, T. (1986). Causal networks versus goal hierarchies in summarizing text. Discourse Processes, 9, 1-15
van den Broek, P., Tzeng, Y., Risden, K., & Trabasso, T. (2001). Inferential questioning: Effects on comprehension of narrative texts as a function of grade and timming. Journal of Educational Psycholog, 93(3), 521.
Wade, S. E. (1990). Using think alouds to assess comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 43, 442-451.
Whitney, P., Ritchie, B. G., & Clark, M. B. (1991). Working memory capacity and the use of elaborative inferences in text comprehension. Discourse Processes, 14, 133-146.
Willoughby, T., Wood, E., & Khan, M. (1994). Isolating variables that impact on or detract from the effectiveness of elaboration strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 279–289.
Winograd, P. N., & Hare,V. C. (1988). Direct instruction of reading comprehension strategies: The nature of teacher explanation. In C. E. Weinstein & E. T. Goetz (Eds.), Learning and study strategies. NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Wood, E., Pressley, M., & Winne, P. H. (1990). Elaborative interrogation effects on children’s learning of factual content. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 741-748.
Yuill, N., & Joscelyne, T. (1988). Effect of organizational cues and strategies on good and poor comprehenders’ story understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 152-158.
Yuill, N., & Oakhill, J. (1988). Effects of inference awareness training on poor reading comprehension. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2, 33-45.
Zwaan, R. A., & Brown, C. M. (1996). The influence of language proficiency and comprehension skill on situation-model construction. Discourse Processes, 21, 289-327.