Are schemas sufficient to interpret the personalization effect? Only if long-term working memory backs up

Abstract

IntroductionIn the field of education, results have shown that text personalization allows for a processing of textual information. Several researchers have explained this advantage using the concept of “schema” but have not taken into account the linguistic nature of the texts. ObjectiveIn this study, we tested the importance of texts in the personalization effect. To do so, four groups of participants were contrasted with regard to the type of material (lists vs. texts) and personalization (personalized vs. non-personalized). MethodPersonalization consisted of introducing, or not, biographical elements allowing the reader to have, or not, a very familiar material to read. Therefore, two personalized groups that read some verbal material (lists or texts) mentioning some familiar locations were compared to two non-personalized groups that read verbal material (lists or texts) featuring unfamiliar locations. For the four groups, each location was associated with two objects. After the presentation phase, participants had to recognize the objects. ResultsAs expected, the personalized group recognized the objects more rapidly than the other group. A second finding showed that when the locations were not inserted in the texts (i.e., in lists), the personalization effect disappeared. ConclusionResults suggest that an explanation just in terms of “schemas” is insufficient. We think that the long-term working memory theory (Ericsson & Kintsch, 1995) allows us to complete this explanation thanks to the concept of episodic text memory.