Two versions of a fictitious recreational park were developed. One des
cribed the location and order of 25 park landmarks as might be encount
ered by a driver (route version). The other (survey version) presented
the same 25 landmarks using spatial or geographic referents. Both ver
sions were 25 sentences in length. Subjects read either the route or s
urvey Version first, one sentence at a time. After reading the text, s
ubjects were given I min. access to a map of the park. The route subje
cts were given a label map, which showed the location of park landmark
s by name. The survey readers were given an icon map, which designated
the same landmarks using pictures. After viewing the map, both groups
were given a set of 20 inferential questions regarding the landmarks.
Subjects then read the same text version again; how ever, half the su
bjects for each text version viewed the same map, while the other half
received the alternate map form. All groups then answered the same se
t of inferential questions. A control group received no feedback on ei
ther reading. Analysis showed that, compared to the control group, the
subjects with feedback showed greater gains in scores across trials.
Survey text readers showed greater gains than route Version readers. F
or both versions, readers given access to the alternate map showed gre
ater gains than those who viewed the same map twice. Moreover, the sur
vey readers benefited more from the map change than the route readers.
The data support prior research which suggests that the survey text b
ase appears more flexible in terms of making greater use of available
feedback, even if different from the original.