Chinese EFL Learners’ Reading And Listening Comprehension Under Different Topic Familiarity

Although reading and listening processing mechanisms have enjoyed extensiveinvestigations, findings are still disputable. Admittedly, there are similarities betweeneffective reading and listening activities. Although reading and listening share somecommon elements in processing, their differences can not be ignored. Reading andlistening performances are the results of the interactions between learners and learningmaterials. Topic familiarity is vital for the interaction because learners could use theirprevious knowledge and experience related to the topics. However, the influence oftopic familiarity on comprehension is still open for discussion. Information type (gistand detail) is one dimension to measure comprehension. Propositions in the text form ahierarchy. The propositions are taken as gist if they are close to the general meaning ofthe text; otherwise the propositions are taken as details. Information type has not beenfully investigated and the existing findings are controversial. Since Chinese EFLlearners’ reading and listening abilities are thought to be imbalanced, things are morecomplicated. What types of information do learners comprehend and does topicfamiliarity have any influence on this? Are there interactions among the influencingfactors? In order to better understand reading and listening comprehension, the presentstudy analyzes learners’ performance on gist and details under different topics. Theresearch questions of the study are as follows:(1) How do participants perform in their reading comprehension (from theperspective of gist and details) under different topic familiarity?(2) How do participants perform in their listening comprehension (from theperspective of gist and details) under different topic familiarity?(3) What are the similarities and differences of reading comprehension andlistening comprehension (from aspects of topic familiarity and information type)?(4) What are the roles of topic familiarity, information type, and modality inreading comprehension and listening comprehension, and are there interactions amongthree variables?103sophomores of English majors in a key university were recruited for theexploration. They were divided into two groups: the reading group and the listeninggroup. All the participants performed comprehension tests under two different topics (familiar and unfamiliar). Comprehension was measured with both free recall protocoland true or false comprehension questions. Both of the two measurements covered theinformation types of gist and details. Through the data we collected and analyzed, wefound that:(1) For the reading group: under the familiar topic, details were comprehendedbetter than gist; under the unfamiliar topic, gist was comprehended better than details;the general performance under the unfamiliar topic surpassed the general performanceunder the familiar topic.(2) For the listening group: under the familiar topic, details were comprehendedbetter than gist; under the unfamiliar topic, gist was comprehended better than details;the general performance under the unfamiliar topic surpassed the general performanceunder the familiar topic.(3) Generally speaking, reading comprehension was better than listeningcomprehension; under the familiar topic, the difference between reading and listeningderived from the comprehension on details; under the unfamiliar topic, the differencebetween reading and listening was shown on both gist and details; for both readingcomprehension and listening comprehension, the performance under the unfamiliartopic was better than the performance under the familiar topic, and this wassignificantly evident for the comprehension of gist.(4) There were main effects on comprehension for topic familiarity, informationtype and modality; there were interactions between any two variables among the three.Modality, topic familiarity and information type influenced comprehensionsignificantly. Comprehension was also affected by the interactions between any two ofthe variables. The influence of one variable couldn’t outweigh the influence of anothervariable. Reading was better than listening, and this was evident under the unfamiliartopic; when the topic was familiar, details were better comprehended in reading andlistening; when the topic was unfamiliar, gist was better comprehended in reading andlistening. It was beyond our expectation that the general comprehension under theunfamiliar topic was better than the general comprehension under the familiar topic.The novelty and peculiarity of an unfamiliar topic could help learners process theinformation actively and deeply.