(3.238.99.243) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/15 19:19
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

: 
twitterline
研究生:陳世銘
研究生(外文):Shih-Ming Chen
論文名稱:以LSA為基礎之兒童中文語意關聯輔助學習系統建置
論文名稱(外文):Developing Children Vocabulary through the use of LSA-base Chinese Vocabulary Learning system
指導教授:郭伯臣郭伯臣引用關係廖晨惠廖晨惠引用關係
指導教授(外文):Bor-Chen KuoChen-Huei Liao
口試委員:陳明蕾張郁雯郭伯臣廖晨惠楊裕貿
口試委員(外文):Ming-Lei ChenYu-Wen ChangBor-Chen KuoChen-Huei LiaoYu-Mao,Yang
口試日期:2013-06-03
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立臺中教育大學
系所名稱:教育測驗統計研究所
學門:教育學門
學類:教育測驗評量學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2013
畢業學年度:102
語文別:中文
論文頁數:98
中文關鍵詞:LSA輔助學習系統兒童中文語意空間潛在語意分析
外文關鍵詞:LSA assisted learning systemchildren’s Chinese semantic spaceLatent Semantic Analysis
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:4
  • 點閱點閱:558
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:27
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:3
本研究旨在建立兒童中文語意空間,並開發以潛在語意分析為基礎之電腦化語意關聯輔助學習系統。首先透過比較不同年級與不同科目間之兒童中文語意空間,來描述語意空間特性。其次藉由詞彙語意效度驗證、句子語意效度驗證、專家關聯度評分以及LSA造句自動化計分等四種方式,來評估兒童中文語意空間的效度。最後再以教學實驗,探討輔助學習系統是否為一有效的輔助教學與學習工具。
本研究主要發現如下:
一、在不同年級間的兒童中文語意空間之相關性比較,「中-高年級」的相關性比「低-中年級」及「低-高年級」為高。另外,在不同科目間的相關性比較亦發現,「國語-社會」的相關性比「國語-自然」及「社會-自然」為高。
二、在詞彙間與句子間的關聯性驗證,兒童中文語意空間與專家評分具高度顯著相關。在LSA以字造句自動化計分評估部分,兒童中文語意空間與專家評分的高度顯著相關亦優於成人語意空間。
三、使用本研究所開發之「以LSA為基礎之電腦化語意關聯輔助學習系統」的教學活動設計,實驗組的學童對於中文識字量、語詞聯想與造句得分,皆顯著高於對照組。
四、教學回饋問卷滿意度調查結果顯示,學童對輔助學習系統持正面肯定態度,代表本系統可用性高,單元的詞彙量適中。

The purposes of this study were to develop a computerized assistant learning system based on LSA to build children’s Chinese semantic space. First, it describes the characteristics of children’s Chinese semantic space by comparing the semantic space in different grades and in different subjects. Secondly, the validity of children’s Chinese semantic space was verified by semantic correlations between words and words, sentences and sentences, correlating in comparing with human scoring, and LSA-based automated scoring on sentence construction. Furthermore, the effectiveness for an assisted teaching and learning instruction that was developed in present study was evaluated by experimental teaching activities.
The results were as follows:
1.In comparison of the correlation of Chinese semantic space in different grades of students, three groups were divided. Group A was comprised by grades 3 and 4 vs. grades 5 and 6. Group B was comprised by grades 1 and 2 vs. grades 3 and 4. Group C was comprised by grades 1 and 2 vs. grades 5 and 6. This study showed that in the correlation of Chinese semantic space, Group A was higher than Group B and Group C. The similar result was observed in the study of different subjects, Chinese Language and Social Studies with a high number of same words would have higher correlation of Chinese semantic space than Chinese Language and Science. Meanwhile, Chinese Language and Social Studies also had higher correlation of Chinese semantic space than the other two subjects – Science and Social Studies.
2.In the aspect of correlations between words and words, sentences and sentences, children’s Chinese semantic space was highly correlated in human scoring. The evaluation of LSA-based automated scoring in sentence construction also showed significantly higher correlation in children’s Chinese semantic space.
3.The experimental group who received the teaching activities with the LSA assisted learning system scored higher than the control group regarding Chinese vocabulary size, the diversity of vocabulary association and sentence construction.
4.Feedback questionnaires indicated that participants have positive attitudes toward teaching activities with the LSA assisted learning system, thus it demonstrated that the system was highly usable and word number of a chapter was applicable.

摘要 I
Abstract III
目 錄 V
表 目 錄 VII
圖 目 錄 VIII
第一章 緒 論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 3
第三節 名詞解釋 4
第二章 文獻探討 7
第一節 潛在語意分析 7
第二節 語料庫與語意空間建置 10
第三節 LSA語意空間輔助學習系統 13
第四節 兒童詞彙語意發展 16
第三章 研究方法 27
第一節 研究流程 27
第二節 建立兒童中文語意空間 28
第三節 兒童中文語意空間之特性與效度驗證 31
第四節 語意關聯輔助學習系統及評估方式 36
第四章 研究結果與討論 43
第一節 兒童中文語意空間特性描述與比較 43
第二節 兒童中文語意空間效度驗證結果 45
第三節 兒童中文語意空間主要功能介紹 51
第四節 語意關聯輔助學習系統使用探討 64
第五章 結論與未來展望 67
第一節 研究結論 67
第二節 研究限制 69
第三節 後續相關研究建議 69
參考文獻 71
中文部分 71
英文部分 77
中文部分
丁偉民(2004)。文章摘要寫作評量系統(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
尹玫君、蘇彥寧(2011)。建置網路學習小組議題報告電腦化評量機制之研究。課程與教學季刊,14(1),55-74。
方金雅(2001)。多向度詞彙評量與教學之研究(未出版之博士論文)。國立高雄師範大學,高雄市。
王虹琇(2009)。資訊融入目標設定教學在二年級學童詞彙學習及合作行為上之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立嘉義大學,嘉義市。
白鎧誌(2011)。以潛在語意分析評估詞彙重要性及其應用(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中教育大學,臺中市。
吳雨潔(2007)。由看圖作文評量國小四年級學生的寫作能力(未出版之碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學,高雄市。
吳憲昌(2002)。台中縣國小六年級學童家庭語文背景、閱讀行為與心得寫作之相關研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中師範學院,臺中市。
李姝慧、陳修元、周泰立(2009)。國小五年級孩童與成人的識字能力對中文字語意處理之效應的差異。中華心理衛生學刊,22(4),345-382。
李惠珠(2000)。國小低年級兒童詞彙能力表現情形和相關研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中師範學院,臺中市。
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(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南大學,臺南市。
汪若文(2004)。運用潛在語意索引的自動化文件分類(未出版之碩士論文)。國立交通大學,新竹市。
沈欣怡(2008)。三位國小六年級學生使用網路用語情形之個案研究(未出版之碩士論文)。臺北市立教育大學,臺北市。
林至誠(1997),字(詞)彙教學的語意網路。師大學報,42,43-54。
林昱成(2009)。詞間空格對國小正常及閱讀困難學生閱讀效率之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立成功大學,臺南市。
林憲治(2003)。國小學童的家庭環境與閱讀態度對於寫作表現之相關研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立嘉義大學,嘉義市。
林蕙蓉(1994)。從兒童國小語文閱讀教學談後設認知策略。國語文教育通訊,8,44-55。
邱怡瑛(2005)。國小學童記敘文寫作過程之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學,高雄市。
柯華葳(1994)。從心理學觀點談兒童閱讀能力的培養。華文世界,74,63-67。
柯華葳(1999)。閱讀能力的發展。載於曾進興(主編),語言病理學基礎第三卷(81-119頁)。臺北市:心理。
胡志偉(1989)。中文詞的辨識歷程。中華心理學刊,31,1-16。
胡志偉、顏乃欣(1992)。閱讀中文的心理歷程:80年代研究的回顧與展望。中國語文心理學研究報告。臺北市:遠流。
翁巧涵(2010)。兒童識字能力對中文語意處理的影響(未出版之碩士論文)。臺北市立教育大學,臺北市。
高柏園、黃宜雯、郭經華、陳俊文(2009)。應用學習系統與網路平台輔助以字帶詞之華語文詞彙教學。第六屆全球華文網路教育研討會,臺北市。
張國恩、宋曜廷(2005)。潛在語意分析及概念構圖在文章摘要和理解評量的應用(3/3)。國家科學委員會專題計畫成果報告(報告編號:NSC93-2520-S-003-011)。臺北市:行政院國家科學委員會。
張雯惠(2006)。國小學生詞彙聯想與造句能力之相關研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學,高雄市。
教育部(2011),國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。臺北市:教育部。
許富翔(2010)。線上新聞查詢建議-利用LSA與GA(未出版之碩士論文)。國立東華大學,花蓮縣。
郭榮芳(2005)。應用潛在語意分析於測驗題庫相似性之比對(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
陳世銘、廖晨惠、郭伯臣(2011)。以LSA為基礎之電腦化語意關聯輔助學習系統。未出版。
陳明彥(2001)。國小學童語言能力、寫字理解能力與寫作表現關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中師範學院,臺中市。
陳明蕾、王學誠、柯華葳(2009)。中文語意空間建置及心理效度驗證:以潛在語意分析技術為基礎。中華心理衛生學刊,51(4),415-435。
陳彥霖(2006)。應用潛在語意分析於試題相似度比較之可行性(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
陳貞佑(2010)。台灣學童詞彙定義能力的發展(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北護理學院,臺北市。
陳家毅(2011)。應用中文句法權重於潛在語意分析技術於中文智能教學系統之對話計分研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣大學,臺北市。
陳密桃、黃秀霜、陳新豐、方金雅(2006)。國小學童詞彙覺識能力多媒體教學之實驗研究。教育學刊,27,93-121。
彭瑞元、陳振宇(2004)。「偶語易安,奇字難適」:探討中文讀者斷詞不一致之原因。中華心理學刊,46,49-55。
曾啟瑞(2008)。國小學童寫作能力發展之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺東大學,臺東縣。
曾雅瑛、黃秀霜(2002)。國民中學中文詞彙測驗之編製。測驗年刊,49(2), 199-216。
馮樹仁(2002)。以潛在語意分析法發展摘要寫作評量系統(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
黃永昌(2008)。中文字、詞在文章閱讀理解的背景下的認知處理歷程(未出版之博士論文)。國立交通大學,高雄市。
黃彥博(2008)。科學文章摘要自動化計分方式的比較研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南大學,臺南市。
黃彥博,洪碧霞,蘇義翔(2011)。科學文章摘要自動化概念比對計分方式的發展與應用。數位學習科技期刊,3(1),1-28。
黃幀祥(2011)。使用潛在語意分析建構文本分類模型-以國小社會科課文為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
楊裕貿(2006)。增進低年級學童詞語習得與寫作運用之教學策略。南投文教,25,76-79。
葉鎮源(2002)。文件自動化摘要方法之研究及其在中文文件的應用(未出版之碩士論文)。國立交通大學,新竹市。
廖晨惠(2011)。閱讀研究議題八:以LSA為基礎之電腦化閱讀認知測驗及AutoTutor建置。國家科學委員會專題計畫成果報告(報告編號:NSC 100-2420-H-142 -001 -MY3)。臺北市:行政院國家科學委員會。
劉英茂(1978)。文句脈絡對於詞義學習的影響。中華心理學刊,20,29-37。
劉嘉玲(2012)。採用潛在語意分析於兒童記敘文詞彙教學之應用(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中教育大學,臺中市。
劉嘉玲、郭伯臣、廖晨惠、白鎧誌(2012)。兒童語意空間之建置與效度初探。「2012資訊科技國際研討會暨第二屆網路智能與應用研討會」發表之論文,朝陽科技大學。
歐素惠(2003)。三種詞彙教學法對閱讀障礙兒童的詞彙學習與閱讀理解之成效研究(未出版之碩士論文)。臺北市立師範學院,臺北市。
歐素惠、王瓊珠(2004)。三種詞彙教學法對閱讀障礙兒童的詞彙學習與閱讀理解之成效研究。特殊教育研究學刊,26,271-292。
蔡欣儒(2010)。國小四年級學童識字量多寡與語用能力、閱讀理解能力之相關研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中教育大學,臺中市。
鄭昭明(1981)。漢字認知的歷程。中華心理學刊,23,137-153。
錡寶香(2000)。國小低寫字能力學童語言能力之研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系特殊教育研究學刊,20,69-96。
錡寶香(2004)。國小低寫字能力學童與一般學童的敘事能力:故事結構之分析。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系特殊教育研究學刊,26,47-269。
薛奕龍(2005)。網路語言對國小作文的影響──以金門縣六年級學童為例(未出版之碩士論文)。銘傳大學,桃園縣。
謝佩原(2004)。目標導向之SOM應用於文件分群(未出版之碩士論文)。國立交通大學,新竹市。
謝玫芳(2011)。家長訓練方案對提升語言發展遲緩兒童詞彙量之初探——以南投山區親子為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北護理健康大學,臺北市。
藍敏杰(2007)。潛在語意分析之摘要評量系統─探討特定領域文章、關鍵詞、奇異值保留個數對建構語意空間及評量效度之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
魏金財(1997)。詞義習得和詞義教學的思考。研習資訊,14(6),81-88。
羅明華(1994)。從先備知識和文章架構談閱讀理解。教師之友,35(4),19-23。
羅秋昭(1999)。國小語文科教材教法。臺北市:五南。
蘇宜芬、陳學志(2007)。認字自動化指標之建立與信效度之研究。教育心理學報,38(4),501-514。
蘇義翔(2007)。華語文閱讀摘要系統。未出版。

英文部分
Aaron, P. G., & Joshi, R. M. (1992). Reading problems: Consultation and remediation. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Baddeley, A. D., Logie, R., Nimmo-Smith, I., & Brereton, N. (1985). Components of fluent reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 119-131.
Bai, X., Yan, G., Liversedge, S.P., Zang, C., & Rayner, K. (2008). Reading spaced and unspaced Chinese text: evidence from eye movements. Journal of Educational Psychology, 34, 1277-1287.
Beck, I., & McKeown, M. (1991). Conditions of vocabulary acquisition. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (pp. 789-814). New York, NY: Longman Press.
Beck, I., Perfetti,C., and McKeown, M. (1982). Effects of long-term vocabulary Instruction on lexical access andreading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 506-521.
Berry, M. W., Drmac, Z., & Jessup, E. (1999). Matrices, vector spaces, and information retrieval. SIAM Review, 41, 335–362.
Bos, C. S., & Anders, P. I. (1990). Effects of interactive vocabulary instruction on the vocabulary learning and reading comprehension of junior high learning disabled students. Learning Disability Quarterly, 13, 31-42.
Chwilla, D. J., Hagoort, P., & Brown, C.M. (1998). The mechanism underlying backward priming in a lexical decision task: spreading activation versus semantic matching. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51A(3), 531-560.
Collins A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82(6), 407-428.
Collins, A. M., & Quillian, M. R. (1969). Retrieval time from semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8(2), 240-248.
Collins, A. M., & Quillian, M. R. (1972). How to make a language user. In E. Tulving & W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization of memory. New York: Academic Press.
Cunningham, A. E., Stanovich, K. E., & Wilson, M. R. (1990). Cognitive variation in adult college students differing in reading ability. In T. H. Carr & B. A. Levy (Eds.), Reading and its development: Component skills approaches (pp. 129-159). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Curtis, M.E. (1981). Word knowledge and verbal aptitudes. In C.A. Perfetti (Ed.), Reading ability. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Daneman, M. (1987). Reading and working memory. In J.R. Beech & A.M. Colley (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to reading (pp. 57-86). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Press.
Daneman, M. (1991). Individual differences in reading skills. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 512-538). New York, NY: Longman Press.
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450-466.
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P.A. (1983). Individual differences in integrating information between and within sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 9, 561-583.
Deerwester, S., Dumais, S. T., Furnas, G. W., Landauer, T.K., & Harshman, R. (1990). Indexing by latent semantic analysis, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41, 391-407.
Dennis, S. (2006). How to use the LSA web site. In T. K. Landauer, D. S. McNamara, S. Dennis & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Handbook of Latent Semantic Analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dixon, D. J. (1990). Organizing vocabulary. Journal of Reading, 33(7), 554-555.
Dole, J. A., Sloan, C., & Trathen, W. (1995). Teaching vocabulary within the context of literature. Journal of Reading, 38(6), 452-460.
Dumais, S. (1991). Improving the retrieval of information from external sources. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 23, 229-236.
Fletcher-Flinn, C.M., & Gravatt, B. (1995). The efficacy of computer assisted instruction (CAI): A meta-analysis. Journal of Education and Computing Research, 12, 219-242.
Follman, J. (1990). Enhancing Children's Vocabularies. Clearing House, 63(7), 329-331.
Goldstein, P. (2004). Helping Young Children with Special Needs Develop Vocabulary. Early Childhood Education Journal, 32(1), 39-43.
Graesser, A. C., Hu, X., & McNamara, D. S. (2005). Computerized learning environments that incorporate research in discourse psychology, cognitive science, and computational linguistics. In A. F. Healy (Ed.), Experimental Cognitive Psychology and Its Applications: Fetschrift in Honor of Lyle Bourne, Walter Kintsch, and Thomas Landauer (pp. 183-194). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Graesser, A. C., Lu, S., Jackson, G. T., Mitchell, H., Ventura, M., Olney, A., & Louwerse, M. M. (2004). AutoTutor: A tutor with dialogue in natural language. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 180-193.
Graesser, A. C., Person, N., Harter, D., & the Tutoring Research Group (2001). Teaching tactics and dialog in AutoTutor. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 257-279.
Graesser, A.C., Penumatsa P., Ventura M., Cai, Z., & Hu, X. (2007) .Using LSA in AutoTutor: Learning through Mixed-initiative Dialogue in Natural Language. In T. Landauer, D.S., McNamara, S. Dennis, & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Handbook of Latent Semantic Analysis (pp. 243-262). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Graff, D., Chen, K., Kong, J., & Maeda, K. (2005). The Linguistic Data Consortium, Chinese Gigaword Second Edition.
Graves, M. F., Juel, C., & Graves, B. B. (2001). Teaching Reading in the 21st Century (2th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Harmon, J. M. (1998). Vocabulary teaching and learning in a seventh-grade literature-based classroom. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 41(7), 518-529.
Hewitt, P.G. (1998).Conceptual physics (8th ed.), MenloPark, CA: Addison-Wesley.
Hu, X., Cai, Z. Graesser, A. C., Ventura, M. (2005). Similarity Between Semantic Spaces. Bara, B. G., Barsalou, L. & Bucciarelli, M. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Stresa, Italy: Cognitive Science Society.
Hulit, L.M. & Howard, M.R. (2006). Born to Talk: An Introduction to Speech and Language Development. (4th ed.). New York, NY: Newbury House Press.
Jessup, E. R., & Martin, J. H. (2001). Taking a new look at the latent semantic analysis approach to information retrieval. Proc. SIAM Workshop Computational Information Retrieval, pp. 121-144, NC: Raleigh.
Johnson, C. J., & Anglin, J. M. (1995). Qualitative developments in the content and form of children's definitions. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38(3), 612-629.
Johnson, D., & Steele, V. (1996). So many words, so little time: Helping college ESL learners acquire vocabulary-building strategies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39(5), 348-357.
Johnston, S. S., Tulbert, B. L., Sebastian, J. P., Devries, K., & Gompert, A. (2000). Vocabulary Development: A Collaborative effort for teaching content vocabulary. Intervention in School & Clinic, 35(5), 311-315.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. (1987). The psychology of reading and language comprehension. Newton, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Kameenui, E. J., Dixon, R. C., & Carnine, D. W. (1987). Issues in the design of vocabulary instruction. In M. G. Mckeown & M. E. Curtis (Eds.), The Nature of Vocabulary Acquisition (pp. 129-145). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kibby, M. W. (1995). The organization and teaching of things and the words that signify them. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39(3), 208-223.
Kim, A. H., Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., & Wei, S. (2004). Graphic organizers and their effects on the reading comprehension of students with LD: A synthesis of research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(2), 105-118.
Koo, M. L. (2002). Semantic priming: a comparison of lexical organization in children and adults. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Landauer, T., & Psotka, J. (2000). Simulating text understanding for educational applications with Latent Semantic Analysis: Introduction to LSA. Interactive Learning Environments, 8(2), 73-86.
Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 211-240.
Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P. W., & Laham, D. (1998). Introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 259-284.
Landauer, T. K., Laham, D., Rehder, B., & Schreiner, M. E. (1997). How well can passage meaning be derived without using word order? a comparison of latent semantic analysis and humans. In M. G. Shafto and P. Langley (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 412-417.
Lemaire, B., Denhiere, G., Bellissens, C., & Jhean-Iarose, S. (2006). A computational model for simulating text comprehension. Behavior Research Methods, 38(4), 628-637.
Letsche, T., & Berry, M. W. (1997). Large-scale information retrieval with latent semantic indexing. Information Sciences, 100, 105–137.
Liao, C. H., Pai, K. C., & Kuo, B. C. (2011). Effectiveness of Automated Chinese Sentence Scoring with LSA. The International Educational Technology Conference(IETC 2011). May. 25-27, 2011, Istanbul, Turkey.
Lizza, M., & Sartoretto, F. (2001). Acomparative analysis of LSI strategies. In M.W. Berry (Ed.), Computational information retrieval. (pp. 171-181). Philadelphia: SIAM.
Ma, W. Y., & Huang C. R. (2006). Uniform and Effective Tagging of a Heterogeneous Giga-word Corpus. Paper presented at the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, Genoa, Italy.
Maletic, J.I. & Marcus, A. (2000). Using latent semantic analysis to identify similarities in source code to support program understanding. Proceedings 12th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, pp. 46-53. dio:10.1109/TAI.2000.889845.
Martin, D.I., & Berry, M. W. (2007). Mathematical Foundations Behind Lantent Semantic Analysis. In T. K. Landauer, D. S. McNamara, S. Dennis, & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Handbook of Latent Semantic Analysis. (pp. 35-55). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
McKeown, M. G. (1985). The acquisition of word meaning from context by children of high and low ability. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 482-496.
McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., Omanson, R. C., & Popel, M. T. (1985). Some effects of the nature and frequency of vocabulary instruction on the knowledge and use of words. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 522-535.
McNamara, D.S., Boonthum, C., Levinstein, I. B., & Millis, K. K., (2007). Evaluating self-explanation in iSTART: Comparing word-based LSA systems. In T. Landauer, D.S. McNamara, S. Dennis, and W. Kintsch (Eds.), Handbook of Latent Semantic Analysis (pp. 227-241). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
McNamara, D.S., Graesser, A.C., McCarthy, P.M., & Cai, Z. (in preparation). Coh-Metrix: Automated Evaluation of Text and Discourse
McNamara, D. S., Levinstein, I. B., & Boonthum, C. (2004). iSTART: Interactive strategy training for active reading and thinking. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 222-233.
Misulis, K. (1999). Making vocabulary development manageable in content instruction. Contemporary Education, 70(2), 25-29.
Moss, H. E., Ostrin, R. R., Tyler, L. K., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1995). Accessing different types of lexical semantic information: Evidence form priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 21, 863-883.
Nagy, W. E., & Herman, P. A. (1987). Breadth and depth of vocabulary knowledge: implications for acquisition and instruction. In M. McKeown and M. Curtis (Eds.), The nature of vocabulary acquisition (pp. 19-35). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates Press.
Nagy, W.E., Herman, P., & Anderson, R. (1985). Learning words from context. Reading research quarterly, 19, 304-330.
Nelson, J. R., & Stage, S. A. (2007). Fostering the Development of Vocabulary Knowledge and Reading Comprehension Though Contextually-Based Multiple Meaning Vocabulary Instruction. Education and Treatment of Children, 30(1), 1-22.
Nelson, K. (1974). Concept, word, and sentence: Interrelations in acquisition and development. Psychological Review, 81, 267-285.
Nelson, K. (1977). The syntagmatic-paradigmatic shift revisited: a review of research and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 84(1), 93-116.
Olde, B. A., Franceschetti, D. R., Karnavat, Graesser, A. C., & the Tutoring Research Group (2002). The right stuff: Do you need to sanitize your corpus when using latent semantic analysis? In W. Gray & C. D. Schunn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 708-713). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Owens, R. E., (2005). Language Development: An Introduction. (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River,NJ: Pearson Education Press.
Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Poindexter, C. (1994). Guessed meanings. Journal of Reading, 37(5), 420-422.
Quesada, J. (2006). Creating your own LSA spaces. In T. K. Landauer, D. S. McNamara, S. Dennis & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Handbook of Latent Semantic Analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Spence, D. E, & Owens, K. C. (1990). Lexical Co-Occurrence and Association Strength. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 19, 317-330.
Thorndike, R. L. (1973). Reading comprehension education in fifteen countries: An empirical study. New York, NY: John Wiley.
Vacca, J. L., Vacca, R. T., & Gove, M. K. (2000). Reading and learning to read (4th ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
Van der Leij, A. (1990). Comprehension failures. In D. A. Balota, G. B. Flores d`Arcais, & K. Rayner (Eds.), Comprehension processes in reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wade-Stein, D., & Kintsch, E. (2004). Summary Street: Interactive computer support for writing. Cognition and Instruction, 22(3), 333-362.
Wang, H. C., Pomplun M., Chen, M. L., Ko, H. & Rayner, K. (2010). Estimating the effect of word predictability on eye movements in Chinese reading using latent semantic analysis and transitional probability, The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63 (7), 1374 -1386.
Wiemer-Hastings, P. (2004). The design and architecture of research methods tutor, a second generation dialog-based tutor. Paper presented at the meeting of In Proceedings of the ITS2004 Workshop on Dialog-based Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Maciao, Brazil.
Yanqing, S., & Qi, D. (2004). An Experiment on Supporting Children's English Vocabulary Learning in Multimedia Context. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 17(2), 131-147

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 楊裕貿(2006)。增進低年級學童詞語習得與寫作運用之教學策略。南投文教,25,76-79。
2. 劉英茂(1978)。文句脈絡對於詞義學習的影響。中華心理學刊,20,29-37。
3. 黃彥博,洪碧霞,蘇義翔(2011)。科學文章摘要自動化概念比對計分方式的發展與應用。數位學習科技期刊,3(1),1-28。
4. 曾雅瑛、黃秀霜(2002)。國民中學中文詞彙測驗之編製。測驗年刊,49(2), 199-216。
5. 彭瑞元、陳振宇(2004)。「偶語易安,奇字難適」:探討中文讀者斷詞不一致之原因。中華心理學刊,46,49-55。
6. 陳密桃、黃秀霜、陳新豐、方金雅(2006)。國小學童詞彙覺識能力多媒體教學之實驗研究。教育學刊,27,93-121。
7. 胡志偉(1989)。中文詞的辨識歷程。中華心理學刊,31,1-16。
8. 柯華葳(1994)。從心理學觀點談兒童閱讀能力的培養。華文世界,74,63-67。
9. 林蕙蓉(1994)。從兒童國小語文閱讀教學談後設認知策略。國語文教育通訊,8,44-55。
10. 尹玫君、蘇彥寧(2011)。建置網路學習小組議題報告電腦化評量機制之研究。課程與教學季刊,14(1),55-74。
11. 歐素惠、王瓊珠(2004)。三種詞彙教學法對閱讀障礙兒童的詞彙學習與閱讀理解之成效研究。特殊教育研究學刊,26,271-292。
12. 鄭昭明(1981)。漢字認知的歷程。中華心理學刊,23,137-153。
13. 錡寶香(2004)。國小低寫字能力學童與一般學童的敘事能力:故事結構之分析。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系特殊教育研究學刊,26,47-269。
14. 魏金財(1997)。詞義習得和詞義教學的思考。研習資訊,14(6),81-88。
15. 羅明華(1994)。從先備知識和文章架構談閱讀理解。教師之友,35(4),19-23。