research-article

Free Access

Cognitively motivated features for readability assessment

Authors:
Lijun Feng

The City University of New York, New York, NY

The City University of New York, New York, NY
View Profile

,
Noemie Elhadad

Columbia University, New York, NY

Columbia University, New York, NY
View Profile

,
Matt Huenerfauth

The City University of New York, New York, NY

The City University of New York, New York, NY
View Profile

EACL '09: Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics March 2009 Pages 229?237

Published: 30 March 2009 Publication History

EACL '09: Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

Pages 229?237

ABSTRACT

We investigate linguistic features that correlate with the readability of texts for adults with intellectual disabilities (ID). Based on a corpus of texts (including some experimentally measured for comprehension by adults with ID), we analyze the significance of novel discourse-level features related to the cognitive factors underlying our users' literacy challenges. We develop and evaluate a tool for automatically rating the readability of texts for these users. Our experiments show that our discourse-level, cognitively-motivated features improve automatic readability assessment.

References

Alias-i. 2008. LingPipe 3.6.0. http://alias-i.com/lingpipe (accessed October 1, 2008) Google Scholar
Barzilay, R., Elhadad, N., 2003. Sentence alignment for monolingual comparable corpora. In Proc EMNLP , pp. 25--32. Google Scholar Digital Library
Barzilay R., Lapata, M., 2008. Modeling Local Coherence: An Entity-based Approach. Computational Linguistics . 34(1):1--34. Google Scholar Digital Library
Carroll, J., Minnen, G., Pearce, D., Canning, Y., Devlin, S., Tait, J. 1999. Simplifying text for language-impaired readers. In Proc. EACL Poster , p. 269. Google Scholar
Chall, J. S., Dale, E., 1995. Readability Revisited: The New Dale-Chall Readability Formula . Brookline Books, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
Charniak, E. 2000. A maximum-entropy-inspired parser. In Proc. NAACL , pp. 132--139. Google Scholar Digital Library
Collins-Thompson, K., and Callan, J. 2004. A language modeling approach to predicting reading difficulty. In Proc. NAACL , pp. 193--200. Google Scholar
Dale, E. and J. S. Chall. 1949. The concept of readability. Elementary English 26(23). Google Scholar
Davison, A., and Kantor, R. 1982. On the failure of readability formulas to define readable texts: A case study from adaptations. Reading Research Quarterly , 17(2):187--209. Google Scholar Cross Ref
Drew, C. J., and Hardman, M. L. 2004. Mental retardation: A lifespan approach to people with intellectual disabilities (8th ed.) . Columbus, OH: Merrill. Google Scholar
Flesch, R. 1948. A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology , 32:221--233. Google Scholar Cross Ref
Fowler, A. E. 1998. Language in mental retardation. In Burack, Hodapp, and Zigler (Eds.), Handbook of Mental Retardation and Development . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press, pp. 290--333. Google Scholar
Frazier, L. 1985. Natural Language Parsing: Psychological, Computational, and Theoretical Perspectives , chapter Syntactic complexity, pp. 129--189. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Galley, M., McKeown, K. 2003. Improving Word Sense Disambiguation in Lexical Chaining. In Proc. IJCAI , pp. 1486--1488. Google Scholar Digital Library
Gunning, R. 1952. The Technique of Clear Writing . McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar
Heilman, M., Collins-Thompson, K., Callan, J., and Eskenazi, M. 2007. Combining lexical and grammatical features to improve readability measures for first and second language texts. In Proc. NAACL , pp. 460--467. Google Scholar
Hickson-Bilsky, L. 1985. Comprehension and mental retardation. International Review of Research in Mental Retardation , 13: 215--246. Google Scholar Cross Ref
Katims, D. S. 2000. Literacy instruction for people with mental retardation: Historical highlights and contemporary analysis. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities , 35(1): 3--15. Google Scholar
Kincaid, J. P., Fishburne, R. P., Rogers, R. L., and Chissom, B. S. 1975. Derivation of new readability formulas for Navy enlisted personnel, Research Branch Report 8--75, Millington, TN. Google Scholar
Kincaid, J., Fishburne, R., Rodgers, R., and Chisson, B. 1975. Derivation of new readability formulas for navy enlisted personnel. Technical report, Research Branch Report 8--75, U.S. Naval Air Station. Google Scholar
McLaughlin, G. H. 1969. SMOG grading - a new readability formula. Journal of Reading , 12(8):639--646. Google Scholar
McNamara, D. S., Ozuru, Y., Graesser, A. C.,&Louwerse, M. (2006) Validating Coh-Metrix., In Proc. Conference of the Cognitive Science Society , pp. 573. Google Scholar
Miller, G., and Chomsky, N. 1963. Handbook of Mathematical Psychology , chapter Finatary models of language users, pp. 419--491. Wiley. Google Scholar
Perfetti, C., and Lesgold, A. 1977. Cognitive Processes in Comprehension, chapter Discourse Comprehension and sources of individual differences. Erlbaum. Google Scholar
Petersen, S. E., Ostendorf, M. 2009. A machine learning approach to reading level assessment. Computer Speech and Language , 23: 89--106. Google Scholar Digital Library
R Development Core Team. 2008. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing . Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org Google Scholar
Roark, B., Mitchell, M., and Hollingshead, K. 2007. Syntactic complexity measures for detecting mild cognitive impairment. In Proc. ACL Workshop on Biological, Translational, and Clinical Language Processing (BioNLP'07) , pp. 1--8. Google Scholar Digital Library
Schwarm, S., and Ostendorf, M. 2005. Reading level assessment using support vector machines and statistical language models. In Proc. ACL , pp. 523--530. Google Scholar Digital Library
Si, L., and Callan, J. 2001. A statistical model for scientific readability. In Proc. CIKM , pp. 574--576. Google Scholar Digital Library
Stenner, A. J. 1996. Measuring reading comprehension with the Lexile framework. 4 ^th North American Conference on Adolescent/Adult Literacy. Google Scholar
U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. Projections of the total resident population by five-year age groups and sex, with special age categories: Middle series 2025--2045 . Washington: U.S. Census Bureau, Populations Projections Program, Population Division. Google Scholar
Weekly Reader, 2008. http://www.weeklyreader.com (Accessed Oct., 2008). Google Scholar
Western/Pacific Literacy Network / Literacyworks, 2008. CNN SF learning resources. http://literacynet.org/cnnsf/ (Accessed Oct., 2008). Google Scholar
Williams, S., Reiter, E. 2005. Generating readable texts for readers with low basic skills. In Proc. European Workshop on Natural Language Generation , pp. 140--147. Google Scholar
Yngve, V. 1960. A model and a hypothesis for language structure. American Philosophical Society , 104:446--466. Google Scholar

Index Terms

Cognitively motivated features for readability assessment
1. Computing methodologies

Recommendations

Automatic readability assessment
Read More
Automatic readability assessment for people with intellectual disabilities

My research goal is to advance our understanding of, and quantify, what makes a text easy or difficult to read, in particular for readers with intellectual disabilities. Previous research in automatic readability assessment has looked at a limited class ...
Read More
Design Guidelines for Web Readability
DIS '17: Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems

Reading is fundamental to interactive-system use, but around 800 million of people might struggle with it due to literacy difficulties. Few websites are designed for high readability, as readability remains an underinvestigated facet of User Experience. ...
Read More

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Published in
EACL '09: Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics
March 2009
905 pages
General Chair:
Alex Lascarides
University of Edinburgh (UK)
,
Program Chairs:
Claire Gardent
CNRS/LORIA Nancy (France)
,
Joakim Nivre
Uppsala University and Vaxjo University (Sweden)
Sponsors
In-Cooperation
Publisher
Association for Computational Linguistics
United States
Publication History
- Published: 30 March 2009
Qualifiers
- research-article
Conference

Acceptance Rates
EACL '09 Paper Acceptance Rate 100 of 360 submissions, 28% Overall Acceptance Rate 100 of 360 submissions, 28%
More
Funding Sources
Other Metrics
View Article Metrics

Article Metrics
- 21
  Total Citations
  View Citations
- 817
  Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months) 50
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks) 4
Other Metrics
View Author Metrics
Cited By
View all

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Cognitively motivated features for readability assessment

EACL '09: Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

ABSTRACT

References

Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

Automatic readability assessment

Automatic readability assessment for people with intellectual disabilities

Design Guidelines for Web Readability

Comments

Login options

Full Access

Published in

Sponsors

In-Cooperation

Publisher

Publication History

Qualifiers

Conference

Acceptance Rates

Funding Sources

Other Metrics

Article Metrics

Other Metrics

Cited By

PDF Format

eReader

Digital Edition

Caption

Cognitively motivated features for readability assessment

EACL '09: Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

ABSTRACT

References

Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

Automatic readability assessment

Automatic readability assessment for people with intellectual disabilities

Design Guidelines for Web Readability

Comments

Login options

Full Access

Published in

Sponsors

In-Cooperation

Publisher

Publication History

Qualifiers

Conference

Acceptance Rates

Funding Sources

Article Metrics

Other Metrics

PDF Format

eReader

Digital Edition

Share this Publication link

Share on Social Media