Reading goal × congruency interaction on memory: study goal improves memory for congruent but not incongruent targets¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr?·q3·i2medium
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i2 Memory for congruent targets was stronger when reading for study than when reading for comprehension (OR = 1.59), but memory for incongruent targets did not differ as a function of reading goals. → Moort 2022
Evidence¶
Moort 2022¶
Moort, M. L. van, Koornneef, A. W., Wilderjans, T. F., & Broek, P. W. van den. (2022). Validation processes and reading purpose: Is validation against knowledge and prior text influenced by reading goal? Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(7), 1533-1552. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000769
q3 · i2 · causal · r?
Mixed-effects logistic regression on recognition memory scores (assessed ~24 hr after reading) revealed a significant goal × congruency interaction (b = -.34, z = -2.25, p = .025). Posthoc comparisons showed "memory for congruent targets was stronger when reading for study than when reading for comprehension" (OR = 1.59), while incongruent targets showed no goal effect (p = .440).
"memory for congruent targets was stronger when reading for study than when reading for comprehension (Mstudy = .80, SEstudy = .01, Mcomp = .70, SEcomp = .01, b = .46, SE = .14, z = 3.39, p , .001, OR = 1.59) but memory for incongruent targets did not differ as a function of reading goals"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Verbal working memory positively and inhibitory control negatively relate to accuracy in the contrasting multiple-choice task — related
- Reading goals affect post-validation representation-building rather than validation processes directly — a broader claim this one bears on
- Both text incongruency and knowledge inaccuracy produce increased reading times on target sentences — related
- Reading goals do not influence validation processes: no goal × congruency or goal × accuracy interactions on reading times — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
goal-congruency-interaction-memory |
title |
Reading goal × congruency interaction on memory: study goal improves memory for congruent but not incongruent targets |
description |
Reading goal × congruency interaction on memory: study goal improves memory for congruent but not incongruent targets |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2022 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-23 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — moort-2022 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.