Reader’s Response and Learning Writing Psychological Perspective
Keywords:Reader response, writing strategy, psychology.
AbstractThis study aims to describe the reader’s response to learning writing psychological perspective. This research is based on experience in the field which shows that the readers' response to writing related to psychology is not so much. Therefore, in this researcher, the response of the reader was explored in depth in relation to writing. The research method used is qualitative. The research subjects were 20 participants. Data collection techniques using interviewing and sequencing. The results and discussion of the study showed that for the assessment stage, participants were more dominant in academic writing than popular writing. For the readers' response to psychology-based writing strategies, they are very responsive 90%, 10% less responsive.
Ahmadi, A. Darni, & Murdiyanto. 2019. Creative Writing Motivation in Higher Education. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies (IJHCS), 5 (4): 1-8.
Ahmadi, A. & Yulianto, B. 2017. Descriptive-Analytical Studies of Literacy Movement in Indonesia, 2003-2017. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies (IJHCS), 4 (7): 1-9.
Ahmadi, A. 2015. Psikologi Menulis. Yogyakarta: Ombak.
Ahmadi, A. Sodiq, S., Setiawan, S., Pratiwi, Y., Hariyati, NH. 2019. Learning Writing through Psychowriting Perspective. Advance in Language and Literary Studies, 10 (1): 1-8, http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.10n.1p.4
Billig, M. (2011), Writing social psychology: Fictional things and unpopulated texts. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50: 4-20. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02003.x
Davis. TF & Womack, K. 2002. Formalist Critism and reader Response. London: Palgrave.
Dollerup, C. and Hansen, C. R. (1992), Readers' Response in Reading: an Experimental Study. Orbis Litterarum, 47: 358-383. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0730.1992.tb01176.x
DiYanni, R. (2017). Reading Responsively, Reading Responsibly. In Critical Reading Across the Curriculum (eds R. DiYanni and A. Borst). doi:10.1002/9781119154907.ch1
Forgeard, M. J., Kaufman, S. B. and Kaufman, J. C. (2013). The Psychology of Creative Writing. In A Companion to Creative Writing, G. Harper (Ed.). doi:10.1002/9781118325759.ch21
Gooda, T. (2016), If We Teach Writing, We Should Write. English Educ, 50: 270-279. doi:10.1111/eie.12114
Hariyati, NH. & Ahmadi, A. 2019. Effectiveness Learning of Critical Reading Using Susiso Model. Proceeding 2nd Workshop on Language, Literature and Society for Education 2 (EAI). pp423-428
Johnson, L.P. ( 2018). Alternative Writing Worlds: The Possibilities of Personal Writing for Adolescent Writers. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 62( 3), 311– 318. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.762
Larson, L. C. (2010), Digital Readers: The Next Chapter in E‐Book Reading and Response. The Reading Teacher, 64: 15-22. doi:10.1598/RT.64.1.2
Lobo, AG. 2013. Reader-Response Theory: A Path Towards Wolfgang Iser. Letras, 54, 13-30.
Schraw, G. and Bruning, R. (1996), Readers' Implicit Models of Reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 31: 290-305. doi:10.1598/RRQ.31.3.4
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).