Given that comparative/contrastive arguments can be displayed separately in a text (one complete argument followed by another, or O-organization) or in an integrated way (with the various aspects interleaved, or A-organization), a study compared a third arrangement--a graphic format, or G-organization--that presented the two descriptions side by side in a tabular arrangement, with row and column headings. Subjects, 18 polytechnic students, were randomly assigned to the three text versions and were given 25 minutes in which to read the text. After the reading task, the subjects were distracted for 10 minutes by an unrelated symbol-identification task that required them to concentrate hard and work quickly. Finally, they were given 15 minutes to write a summary of the text as described in the instructions. Results showed that on general recall there were no significant differences between the three groups. On a comparative measure, however, the G-organization group scored significantly higher than the other two groups. Obviously, the graphic layout of the G-organized text made the comparative/contrastive structure of the argument much more obvious than either of the continuous prose versions. (HOD)