Cover not available

In:Writing(s) at the Crossroads: The process–product interface
Edited by Georgeta Cislaru
[Not in series 194] 2015
► pp. 255–276

Get fulltext
PDF logo with download linkDownload Chapter PDF

Conflict in writing

Actions and objects

 | Southampton Education School, University of Southampton
 | Centre for Language and Cognition, University of Groningen
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 5 August 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/z.194.13gal
This chapter argues that writing involves an interaction between conflicting cognitive systems, one designed for the construction of mental objects and the other for the taking of actions. It characterises the construction of mental objects as a problem-solving process involving the retrieval of content from episodic memory and the manipulation of content in working memory. The system for action involves the synthesis of content guided by implicit constraints within semantic memory. The chapter then reviews research investigating the effects of different types of planning and individual differences in goals and beliefs on the development of understanding during writing and on the quality of text. It concludes by discussing the effectiveness of different drafting strategies and implications for theories of writing.
References (28)
References
Baaijen, Veerle M., David Galbraith, and Kees de Glopper. 2014. “Effects of writing beliefs and planning on writing performance.” Learning and Instruction 33: 81–91. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baddeley, Alan. 1986. Working Memory. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bereiter, Carl. 2002. Education and Mind in the Knowledge Age. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bereiter, Carl, and Marlene Scardamalia. 1987. The Psychology of Written Composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Churchland, Paul M. 2012. Plato’s Camera: How the Brain Captures a Landscape of Abstract Universals. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Galbraith, David. 1992. “Conditions for discovery through writing.” Instructional Science 21: 45–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999. “Writing as a knowledge-constituting process.” In Knowing What to Write, ed. by Mark Torrance, and David Galbraith, 139–160. Amsterdam, NL: Amsterdam University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. “Writing as discovery.” British Journal of Educational Psychology Monograph Series II 6 – Teaching and Learning Writing: 5–26.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Galbraith, David, and Mark Torrance. 2004. “Revision in the context of different drafting strategies.” In Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes, ed. by Linda Allal, Lucile Chanquoy, and Pierre Largy, 63–86. Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Galbraith, David, Sheila Ford, Gillian Walker, and Jessica Ford. 2005. “The contribution of different components of working memory to knowledge transformation during writing.” L1 – Educational Studies in Language and Literature 5: 113–145. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Galbraith, David, Mark Torrance, and Jenny Hallam. 2006. “Effects of writing on conceptual coherence.” Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society: 1340–1345.
Galbraith, David, Luuk van Waes, and Mark Torrance. 2007. “Introduction.” In Writing and Cognition: Research and Applications, ed. by Mark Torrance, Luuk van Waes, and David Galbraith, 1–10. Amsterdam, NL: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Galbraith, David, Jenny Hallam, Thierry Olive, and Nathalie Le Bigot. 2009. “The role of different components of working memory in writing.” Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society: 3028–3033.
Glasspool, David, W., Tim Shallice, and Lisa Cipolotti. 2006. “Towards a unified process model for graphemic buffer disorder and deep dysgraphia”. Cognitive Neuropsychology 23(3): 479–512. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kellogg, Ronald, T. 1994. The Psychology of Writing. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kieft, Marleen, Gert Rijlaarsdam, David Galbraith, and Huub van den Bergh. 2006. “The effects of adapting a writing course to students’ writing strategies.” British Journal of Educational Psychology 77(3): 565–578. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klein, Perry D. 1999. “Reopening inquiry into cognitive processes in writing-to-learn.” Educational Psychology Review 11(3): 203–270. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klein, Perry D. and Lori C Kirkpatrick. 2010. “A framework for content area writing: Mediators and moderators.” Journal of Writing Research 2(1): 1–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Landauer, Thomas K., Danielle S. McNamara, Simon Dennis, and Walter Kintsch. 2007. Handbook of Latent Semantic Analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leijten, Marielle, and Luuk van Waes. 2006. “Inputlog: New perspectives on the logging of online writing.” In Computer keystroke logging and writing: Methods and applications, ed. by Kirk P.H. Sullivan, and Eva Lindgren, 73–93. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McClelland, James. L., Bruce, L. McNaughton, and Randall C. O’Reilly. 1995. “Why there are complementary learning systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: Insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory.” Psychological Review 102: 419–457. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norman, Kenneth A. 2010. “How hippocampus and cortex contribute to recognition memory: Revisiting the Complementary Learning Systems model.” Hippocampus 20(11): 1217–1227. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Reilly, Randall C., Rajan Bhattacharyya, Michael D. Howard, and Nicholas Ketza. 2011. “Complementary Learning Systems.” Cognitive Science April 2011: 1–20.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Popper, Karl R. 1972. Objective Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rogers, Timothy, T., and James, L. McClelland. 2004. Semantic Cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Snyder, Mark 1979. “Self-monitoring processes.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 12: 86–131.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
White, Mary J., and Roger Bruning. 2005. “Implicit writing beliefs and their relation to writing quality.” Contemporary Educational Psychology 30: 166–189. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Winocur, Gordon, Morris Moscovitch, and Bruno Bontempi. 2010. “Memory formation and long-term retention in humans and animals: Convergence towards a transformation account of hippocampal–neocortical interactions.” Neuropsychologia 48: 2339–2356. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Van Hulle, Dirk
2024. 2.2.1. Metaphors for the writing process. In A Comparative History of the Literary Draft in Europe [Comparative History of Literatures in European Languages, XXXV], ► pp. 434 ff. DOI logo
Van Hulle, Dirk
2024. 2.2.1. Metaphors for the writing process. In A Comparative History of the Literary Draft in Europe [Comparative History of Literatures in European Languages, XXXV], ► pp. 434 ff. DOI logo
Ashley, Sue, Harmen Schaap & Elly de Bruijn
2023. Illustrating conceptual understanding in international business undergraduate writing. Research Papers in Education 38:4 ► pp. 499 ff. DOI logo
Hanauer, David I.
2022. The writing processes underpinning wellbeing: Insight and emotional clarity in poetic autoethnography and freewriting. Frontiers in Communication 7 DOI logo
Hanauer, David I.
2025. The Writing Processes and Importance of Quality Images for Self-Discovery in Poetic Inquiry. Scientific Study of Literature 14:1 ► pp. 45 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue