While starting a quick&dirty search on "gist" I found a couple of articles that pulled me towards Brian's overarching request: that I become familiar with some of the psychology literature germane to the areas we work in.

Starting with the article:

The Construction of Meaning from Text: possible effects of different reading strategies

I refined the search to:

The Construction of Meaning from Text reading strategies

I then returned to the 'gist' search.

Next I found another diverging article:

Got to get going on my IAT 814 and 802 term projects.

Started with the idea of reading for gist, a model principally from

O'Halloran, K. (2003). Critical discourse analysis and language cognition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Wanted to get a deeper view on the concept, so did a google scholar search using combined SFUBC proxies and VPNs.

Found about 32 articles with the following strategy:

"reading for gist" -esl -teacher

Downloaded (and meta-scraped) 11...but only about 7 from this search.

My expectations about the arrival of sensory data depend on & are moderated by my surroundings.

Too much concision is hard to follow.

So I will elaborate a little. (okay, a lot...)

The purpose of this section is to show why the catagories in our schema were chosen and how they contribute to our understanding of things.

To recap, I call 'all things that exist' Entities. When I use this term, I am talking specifically about this category. When I say things, I mean much as I expect everyone else does; as a generic & inclusive term for 'stuff.' When I say 'I,' I am refering to a logical step or explanation that I have taken. When I say 'we,' I am refering to a common abstraction that I assume applies uniformly to us english speakers (& readers).