Linguistic Features of Writing Quality

Danielle S. McNamara University of Memphis ; Scott A. Crossley Mississippi State University ; Philip M. McCarthy University of Memphis

Abstract

In this study, a corpus of expert-graded essays, based on a standardized scoring rubric, is computationally evaluated so as to distinguish the differences between those essays that were rated as high and those rated as low. The automated tool, Coh-Metrix, is used to examine the degree to which high- and low-proficiency essays can be predicted by linguistic indices of cohesion (i.e., coreference and connectives), syntactic complexity (e.g., number of words before the main verb, sentence structure overlap), the diversity of words used by the writer, and characteristics of words (e.g., frequency, concreteness, imagability). The three most predictive indices of essay quality in this study were syntactic complexity (as measured by number of words before the main verb), lexical diversity (as measured by the Measure of Textual Lexical Diversity), and word frequency (as measured by Celex, logarithm for all words). Using 26 validated indices of cohesion from Coh-Metrix, none showed differences between high- and low-proficiency essays and no indices of cohesion correlated with essay ratings. These results indicate that the textual features that characterize good student writing are not aligned with those features that facilitate reading comprehension. Rather, essays judged to be of higher quality were more likely to contain linguistic features associated with text difficulty and sophisticated language.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2010-01-01
DOI
10.1177/0741088309351547
CompPile
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation context

Cited by in this index (47)

  1. Assessing Writing
  2. Assessing Writing
  3. Assessing Writing
  4. Assessing Writing
  5. Journal of Writing Analytics
Show all 47 →
  1. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  2. Assessing Writing
  3. Assessing Writing
  4. Written Communication
  5. Written Communication
  6. Assessing Writing
  7. Assessing Writing
  8. Assessing Writing
  9. Written Communication
  10. Assessing Writing
  11. Assessing Writing
  12. Assessing Writing
  13. Assessing Writing
  14. Assessing Writing
  15. Assessing Writing
  16. Journal of Writing Analytics
  17. Assessing Writing
  18. Assessing Writing
  19. Assessing Writing
  20. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  21. Written Communication
  22. Assessing Writing
  23. Journal of Writing Analytics
  24. Assessing Writing
  25. Written Communication
  26. Assessing Writing
  27. Assessing Writing
  28. Assessing Writing
  29. Assessing Writing
  30. Assessing Writing
  31. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  32. Assessing Writing
  33. Assessing Writing
  34. Assessing Writing
  35. Assessing Writing
  36. Computers and Composition
  37. Written Communication
  38. Assessing Writing
  39. Written Communication
  40. Written Communication
  41. Rhetoric Review
  42. Written Communication

References (59) · 3 in this index

  1. The CELEX lexical database
  2. 10.1075/sl.7.3.05bam
     ↗
  3. Biber, D. ( 2003). Variation among university spoken and written registers: A new multidimensional analysis. …
     ↗
  4. Development of readability analyses
  5. SPSS for psychologists: A guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows
Show all 59 →
  1. Readability revisited: The new Dale-Chall readability formula
  2. Proceedings of the First Conference on North American Chapter of the Association for Comp…
  3. College Composition and Communication
  4. 10.1080/14640748108400805
     ↗
  5. 10.1080/08351818409389208
     ↗
  6. 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00507.x
     ↗
  7. 10.2307/1495373
     ↗
  8. 10.2307/747483
     ↗
  9. Writing: Step by step
  10. 10.1017/CBO9780511816796.038
     ↗
  11. 10.4324/9780203506929
     ↗
  12. Discovering statistics using SPSS
  13. 10.4324/9780203463932_UC_and_the_SAT
     ↗
  14. 10.21236/ADA221854
     ↗
  15. 10.1075/z.74
     ↗
  16. 10.1075/idj.15.3.02gra
     ↗
  17. Graesser, A.C., McNamara, D.S. & Louwerse, M.M. (2003). What do readers need to learn in order to process coh…
  18. 10.3758/BF03195564
     ↗
  19. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory
  20. University of Arizona Working Papers in Linguistics
  21. Cohesion in English
  22. The psychology of reading and language comprehension
  23. 10.1037/0033-295X.99.1.122
     ↗
  24. Journal of Writing Research
  25. 10.4324/9780203936399
     ↗
  26. Leki, I. ( 1993). Reciprocal themes in ESL reading and writing. In J. Carson & I. Leki (Eds.), Reading in the…
  27. Making the most of college
     ↗
  28. Lightman, E.J., McCarthy, P.M., Dufty, D.F. & McNamara, D.S. (2007). The structural organization of high scho…
  29. 10.1016/j.system.2005.02.002
     ↗
  30. 10.1515/cogl.2002.005
    Cognitive Linguistics  ↗
  31. Louwerse, M.M., McCarthy, P.M., McNamara, D.S. & Graesser, A.C. (2004). Variation in language and cohesion ac…
  32. 10.2190/1LN8-7BQE-8TN0-M91L
     ↗
  33. Dissertation Abstracts International
  34. McCarthy, P.M., Briner, S.W., Rus, V. & McNamara, D.S. (2007). Textual signatures: Identifying text-types usi…
     ↗
  35. 10.1177/0265532207080767
     ↗
  36. Proceedings of the 19th Annual Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Internati…
  37. 10.1207/S15326985EP3501_3
     ↗
  38. 10.1037/h0087352
     ↗
  39. 10.4324/9780203810033
     ↗
  40. Discourse Processes
  41. 10.3758/BF03195736
     ↗
  42. 10.1093/ijl/3.4.235
     ↗
  43. 2002 NAEP Writing 2002 State Snapshot Records (NCES 2003-532)
  44. 10.1080/01638530709336895
     ↗
  45. 10.3102/0002831206298171
     ↗
  46. 10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1
     ↗
  47. 10.1037/0278-7393.31.6.1281
     ↗
  48. Raimes, A. ( 2001). What unskilled ESL students do as they write: A classroom study of composing. In T. Silva…
  49. Arob@se
  50. The psychology of reading
  51. 10.1006/jecp.1996.0054
     ↗
  52. Using multivariate statistics
  53. Assessing Writing
  54. 10.2307/356693
     ↗