generating ideas in writing
DESCRIPTION
Generating ideas in writing. David Galbraith [email protected] Centre for Educational Psychology Research Staffordshire University. Introduction. Writing as discovery Two ideologies Classical art of invention Romantic self-expression Dual process model . - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Generating ideas in writing
David [email protected]
Centre for Educational Psychology ResearchStaffordshire University
![Page 2: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Introduction
• Writing as discovery
• Two ideologies – Classical art of invention– Romantic self-expression
• Dual process model
![Page 3: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Writing as problem solving (Hayes, 1996; Bereiter and Scardamalia, 1987)
• The thinking behind the text– Retrieval of content from long-term memory– Manipulation in working memory
• Knowledge telling v knowledge transforming– Adapting to external rhetorical constraints
• Problem solving all the way down?– Text production as local planning– Passive output process
![Page 4: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Descriptions by expert writers (selected from Murray, 1978)
• W. H. Auden. Language is the mother, not the handmaiden, of thought; words will tell you things you never thought or felt before.
• Robert Bolt: Writing a play is thinking, not thinking about thinking.
• E. M. Forster: How do I know what I think until I see what I say?
• Wright Morris: The language leads, and we continue to follow where it leads.
![Page 5: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Self-monitoring(Snyder, 1987; Gangestad & Snyder, 2000) • High self-monitors
– are "particularly sensitive to the expression and self-presentation of relevant others in social situations and use these cues as guidelines for monitoring (that is regulating and controlling) their own verbal and non-verbal self-presentation".
– Assume that they are more likely to direct their writing towards rhetorical goals (external constraints).
• Low self-monitors’
– “expressive behaviour is controlled from within by their affective states (they express it as they feel it) rather than moulded and tailored to fit the situation".
– They are more likely to express their ideas directly as they unfold (internal constraints).
![Page 6: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
New ideas as a function of self-monitoring and mode of writing
Galbraith (1992, 1996)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Notes Prose
Low SMHigh SM
![Page 7: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Knowledge transforming during planningGalbraith, Hallam, Olive & le Bigot (2009)
• 96 low and high self-monitors writing article about pros and cons of legalising cannabis.
• Three phases– listing ideas (phase 1) (5 minutes)– constructing outline (phase 2) (10 minutes)– writing article (30 minutes)
• Secondary tasks loading on different components of working memory during phase 2– Control– Visual– Spatial– General interference
![Page 8: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
![Page 9: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Number of new ideas added in phase 2
![Page 10: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Mean rating of text quality
![Page 11: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Relationship between idea change and text quality
• R=.44, p<.001 (16% of the variance)– Greater similarity between list and outline
(LSA)– More new ideas– More rhetorical groupings in outline
• Reorganisation of existing content within new global structure that satisfies rhetorical constraints (knowledge transforming)
![Page 12: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Cohmetrix analysis• Text quality correlated with 4 objective features
(R = .51, p <.001)– elaborated text– logical argument– global coherence– anaphoric reference (negative)
• All secondary task conditions showed higher levels of anaphoric reference
• Low SM more locally coherent text than high SM• Spatial condition less two-sided argument
![Page 13: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Summary
• Knowledge transforming predicts text quality
• Disrupting outlining reduces text quality• Spatial component of working memory
required to represent content as distinct ideas
• Low and high self-monitors differ in how they produce text (local coherence)
![Page 14: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Galbraith, Torrance & Hallam (2006)
• 96 low and high self-monitors writing an essay discussing whether the use of violence to achieve political aims can be justified.
• 3 writing conditions– Rough draft – Outline planned – Control
List ideas & rate relationships before writingWrite
List ideas & rate relationships after writing
![Page 15: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Mean number of new ideas as a function of self-monitoring and writing condition
![Page 16: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Mean harmony before and after writing as a function of writing condition and self-monitoring
![Page 17: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Conclusion for text production
• Dispositionally guided writing, free from external constraints, leads to generation of novel content, coherently related to existing content
• Rhetorical organisation disrupts conceptual coherence of text
![Page 18: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Dual process model(Galbraith, 2009)
• Knowledge-retrieval process
– Retrieval of ideas from explicit memory store (hippocampus)– Manipulation of ideas in working memory to create rhetorically appropriate global
model– Dependent on spatial component of working memory– Leads to creation of single knowledge object in episodic memory (but not
understanding)
• Knowledge-constituting process
– Synthesis of ideas within semantic memory (neo-cortex)– Dispositionally guided text production– Sequential process, not dependent on spatial component of working memory– Leads to formulation of ideas corresponding to writer’s implicit understanding of
the topic
![Page 19: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
A simple feedforward network• Units sum up input
activation and pass it on to next layer
• Superpositional storage– Fixed weights
represent knowledge and guide processing
• Contextually specific synthesis of output in response to input
![Page 20: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Knowledge-constituting process
• Writer’s disposition = fixed connections between features in a high dimensional semantic space (internal constraints)
• Ideas created by constraint satisfaction within network (content synthesis)
• Successive utterances produced by inhibitory feedback from output to disposition (self-movement of thought)
![Page 21: Generating ideas in writing](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062502/56816812550346895ddda1b8/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Conclusion
• 2 different kinds of process– Explicit organising process to adapt to external
constraints– Implicit organising process guided by internal
constraints• Both processes required for effective writing• Fundamental conflict because processes are
optimised under opposing conditions• Self-concept influences conflict-management
strategy– Low SM prioritise knowledge-constituting – High SM prioritise knowledge-transforming