Comprehension Breakdown and Regulatory Strategies in Academic Reading: A Think-Aloud Case Study of University Students in Kupang, Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1611.31Keywords:
academic reading, comprehension breakdowns, think-aloud protocol, Kupang studentsAbstract
Academic reading is central to the performance of higher education students, but how students manage difficulties in reading comprehension remains under-researched. This study examined the comprehension breakdown and regulatory strategies that students verbalized during reading, focusing on strategies readers use to restore understanding and increase comprehension. Nine second-semester university students in Kupang, Indonesia, were involved in a think-aloud reading task followed by stimulated recall interviews. The results showed that academic reading unfolded in several episodes rather than as a smooth linear process when they found difficult technical terms, abbreviations, abstract conceptual labels, and underspecified evidential claims. Three main strategies to achieve comprehension were repair chains, concretization bridges to recover abstract meaning, and the application of meaning monitoring or epistemic monitoring. Across cases, participants varied in the density and depth of regulatory strategies; some produced longer, less stable episodes, while others often recovered meaning through glossing, paraphrasing, inference, and evaluative monitoring.
References
Abas, I. H., & Abd Aziz, N. H. (2018). Model of the writing process and strategies of EFL proficient student writers: A case study of Indonesian learners. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 26(3), 1815–1842.
Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to Read: Thinking and Learning about Print. MIT Press.
Alruthaya, S., Mantei, J., White, S. L. J., & Kervin, L. (2025). Moving towards a more comprehensive understanding of multimodal text complexity. The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 48(2), 119–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44020-025-00079-9
Atkinson, D., & Smith Risser, H. (2023). Exploring students' responses to reading assignments in first-year university mathematics courses. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 53(1), 38–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2022.2126415
Bergman, L. (2024). Students’ reading in higher education: Challenges and ways forward. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 67(6), 414–423. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1346
Bowles, M. A. (2018). Introspective verbal reports: Think-alouds and stimulated recall. In A. Phakiti, P. De Costa, L. Plonsky, & S. Starfield (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of applied linguistics research methodology (pp. 339–357). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59900-1_16
Bråten, I., Brandmo, C., Ferguson, L. E., & Strømsø, H. I. (2022). Epistemic justification in multiple document literacy: A refutation text intervention. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 71, Article 102122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2022.102122
Chall, J. S. (1983). Stages of Reading Development. McGraw-Hill.
Chapman, M., Quick, S. N., & Freeman, P. (2024). An investigation of in situ cognitions of English Premier League academy football coaches using stimulated recall and think aloud protocol. Journal of Coaching and Sports Science, 3(2), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.58524/002024335600
Charters, E. (2003). The use of think-aloud methods in qualitative research: An introduction to think-aloud methods. Brock Education Journal, 12(2), 68–82. https://doi.org/10.26522/brocked.v12i2.38
Craig, K., Hale, D., Grainger, C., & Stewart, M. E. (2020). Evaluating metacognitive self-reports: Systematic reviews of the value of self-report in metacognitive research. Metacognition and Learning, 15, 155–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09222-y
Duke, N. K., & Cartwright, K. B. (2021). The science of reading progresses: Communicating advances beyond the simple view of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(S1), S25–S44. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.411
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. MIT Press.
Fan, Y., Rakovic, M., van der Graaf, J., Lim, L., Singh, S., Moore, J., Molenaar, I., Bannert, M., & Gašević, D. (2023). Towards a fuller picture: Triangulation and integration of the measurement of self-regulated learning based on trace and think-aloud data. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(4), 1303–1324. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12801
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2000). Stimulated recall methodology in second language research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101(3), 371–395. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.3.371
Hildenbrand, L., Sarmento, D., Griffin, T. D., & Wiley, J. (2024). Conceptual overlap among texts impedes comprehension monitoring. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 31(2), 750–760. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-023-02349-4
Hoang, G. T. L., & Storch, N. (2024). How do EFL learners process and uptake Criterion automated corrective feedback? Insights from two case studies. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 12(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.30466/ijltr.2024.121420
Holschuh, J. P. (2020). College Reading and studying: The complexity of academic literacy task demands. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 62(6), 599–604. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.876
Hung, C. O.-Y., Cai, M., & Liao, X. (2025). Contribution of executive function to different levels of reading comprehension. Journal of Research in Reading. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.70011
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Kiili, C., Strømsø, H. I., Bråten, I., Ruotsalainen, J., & Räikkönen, E. (2024). Reading comprehension skills and prior topic knowledge serve as resources when adolescents justify the credibility of multiple online texts. Reading Psychology, 45(7), 662–689. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2024.2351485
Lea, M., & Street, B. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079812331380364
Mason, W., & Warmington, M. (2024). Academic reading as a grudging act: How do higher education students experience academic reading and what can educators do about it? Higher Education, 88, 839–856. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01145-2
McCrudden, M. T., Huynh, L., Lyu, B., Kulikowich, J. M., & McNamara, D. S. (2024). Coherence building while reading multiple complementary documents. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 77, Article 102266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2024.102266
McMaster, K. L., & Kendeou, P. (2023). Refocusing reading comprehension: Aligning theory with assessment and intervention. Learning and Individual Differences, 102, Article 102256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102256
McNamara, D. S. (2004). SERT: Self-explanation reading training. Discourse Processes, 38(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp3801_1
Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 26, pp. 125–173). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60053-5
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I and II): Country note—Indonesia. OECD.
Paige, D., Rupley, W. H., & Ziglari, L. (2024). Critical thinking in reading comprehension: Fine-tuning the simple view of reading. Education Sciences, 14(3), Article 225. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14030225
Paulhus, D. L. (2017). Socially desirable responding on self-reports. In V. Zeigler-Hill & T. Shackelford (Eds.), Encyclopedia of personality and individual differences. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_1349-1
Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. Oxford University Press.
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Rayner, K., Pollatsek, A., Ashby, J., & Clifton, C. (2012). The Psychology of Reading (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Reynolds, T., Rush, L. S., Lampi, J. P., & Holschuh, J. P. (2020). English disciplinary literacy: Enhancing students' literary interpretive moves. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 64(2), 201–209. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1066
Schellings, G., & Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2011). Measuring strategy use with self-report instruments: Theoretical and empirical considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 6(2), 83–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-011-9081-9
Smith, F. (2004). Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read. Routledge.
Snow, C. E., & Sweet, A. P. (2003). Reading for comprehension. In A. Sweet & C. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 1–11). Guilford Press.
Supardan, A. I., & Capati, M. W. (2026). AI as a metacognitive mirror: How students use AI to monitor and repair reading comprehension breakdowns. DUTIES: Education and Humanities International Journal, 2(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.70152/duties.v2i1.320
Tang, K., Noordin, N., & Ismail, L. (2025). Evaluating the think-aloud method for English reading: A systematic review. Cogent Education, 12(1), Article 2497150. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2497150
Tian, L., Liu, Q., & Zhang, X. (2022). Self-regulated writing strategy use when revising upon automated, peer, and teacher feedback in an online English as a foreign language writing course. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 873170. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.873170
Tibken, C., & Tiffin-Richards, S. P. (2025). Reading behavior as an indicator of comprehension monitoring when reading expository texts. Metacognition and Learning, 20, Article 38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-025-09440-2
Veenman, M. V. J. (2011). Alternative assessment of strategy use with self-report instruments: A discussion. Metacognition and Learning, 6(2), 205–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-011-9080-x
Zhai, X., Chu, X., Wang, M., Tsai, C.-C., & Spector, J. M. (2024). A systematic review of stimulated recall (SR) in educational research from 2012 to 2022. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11, Article 489. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02987-6
