Machine summary:
"At this stage, the subjects were expected to decide whether, given the truth of the statement, the restatement was true or false and also to rate the combination on seven variables as follows: general complexity imagery world knowledge lexical difficulty semantic complexity syntactic complexity factuality/inferentiality with 1 meaning completely factual and 5 completely inferential.
To find out whether there are significant differences among the five levels of factuality/inferentiality as assigned by subjects with regard to their rating of item(statement plus restatement)complexity, a further ANOVA was utilized which showed that the key levels are meaning- fully distinguished(P.
Table 5 Mean differences of item complexity ratings(staterestate)on the basis of the 5 statement types Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: staterestate Scheffe >CS< * The mean difference is significant at the .
The results(Tables 8 & 9)rejected any complexity judgment differences, as stated by subjects, between factual and inferential items, as designed by the researcher, which further confirms that sub- jects judgment has been, to a large extent, based on a mechanical (simple addition)interplay between statement complexity and re- statement complexity not by their pragmatic interaction as catego- rized by the researcher.
An equally considerable application of the study has to do with testing reading comprehension whereby test developers get aware of the degree of complexity each of the investigated variables imposes on the text so that they can decide upon the overall degree of statement, restatement, and item complexity in such a way that complexity judgment and performance become more predictable."