The Role of Epistemic Beliefs in the Comprehension of Multiple Expository Texts: Toward an Integrated Model

Figures & data

TABLE 1 Strategic Processes That Support the Representation of Different Documents Model Components

	Strategic Processes
Situation model	• Corroboration to compare texts or passages within texts and look for consistencies or discrepancies among texts or passages.
Document node information	• Sourcing to locate source information prior to reading.
	• Monitor evaluation of document and author characteristics.
	• Sourcing facilitated by inconsistencies, agreement of important or previously uncertain information.
Source-content links	• Sourcing to connect source information to content and to use that information to interpret content.
Source-source links	• Corroboration to compare perspectives and look for consistencies or discrepancies among them.

TABLE 2 Core Steps Involved in the Construction of a Documents Model According to Rouet and Britt's (in press) MD-TRACE Model

Step	Means	Outcome
1. Create/update task model	Processing of explicit task specifications and contextual constraints	Task model (memory representation of the task)
2. Assess information need	Assessment of current state of knowledge and goal achievement	Decision to turn to external information resources or to proceed otherwise (reflect, take notes)
3. Interaction with documents
3a. Select document	Use of search devices; browsing lists of tables of contents, menus, indexes, headings, and other text organizers	Choice of a document
3b. Process text contents	Reading and comprehension	Situation model
3c. Create/update a documents model	Sourcing, intertextual integration, corroboration	Intertext model, including document nodes, content integration when possible, source-content links, and source-source links using intertextual predicates.
4. Create/update a task product	Production of information (e.g. speaking, writing, drawing, computing)	Product as required in the task specification
5. Assess product completeness/quality with respect to task model	Compare task product with task model; assess goal achievement and further needs	Decision to stop activity or to recycle through either Steps 1, 2 or 4

TABLE 3 Summary of Empirical Links between Epistemic Belief Dimensions and Multiple-Text Comprehension

Simplicity Dimension	Certainty Dimension	Source Dimension	Justification Dimension
Knowledge is theoretical and complex: Better cross-text comprehension and integration; more cross-text elaboration and overview generation; less trust in newspaper.	Knowledge is tentative and evolving: Better cross-text comprehension and integration; benefit of argument task; better coverage of complex and uncertain information.	Knowledge is transmitted from experts: Better cross-text comprehension and integration; higher trust in textual information; less use of own opinion as basis for trust judgments.	Justification through reason, rules of inquiry, and cross-checking of knowledge sources: Better cross-text comprehension and integration; more use of metacognitive strategies; higher trust in scientific text; use of more criteria to justify trust judgments.

FIGURE 1 An integrated model of epistemic beliefs and documents model representation resulting from the reading of four different texts about climate change. Note. The situations-model component consists of boxes and solid lines; the intertext-model component of ovals and broken lines. The strength of the links between the epistemic belief dimensions and the components of the documents model is represented by the thickness of the lines.

TABLE 4 Specific Hypothesized Relations Between Epistemic Belief Dimensions and Documents Model Construction

	Simplicity Dimension	Certainty Dimension	Source Dimension	Justification Dimension
Situations-model construction	Complex: Defines task as integration; aims at coherent representation; engages in overview generation, cross-text elaboration, and monitoring (corroboration); accepts coherent, integrated understanding.	Tentative and evolving: Corroborates to create representation based on argument schema. Certain: Processes information superficially in single text to locate correct answer.	Transmitted by experts: Gives prominence to trustworthy information in overall representation; corroborates in search for expert knowledge and evidence. Constructed by self: Differentiates less between trustworthy and untrustworthy information in overall representation; builds on poorer textbase representations; corroborates less.	Adaptive: Bridges different perspectives by planning, monitoring, regulating, and corroborating; uses argument schema to organize situations model. Maladaptive: Uses metacognitive strategies, including corroboration, less; less use of argument schema to organize situation models.
	Simple: Defines task as accumulation; aims to create catalogue of facts; relies on rehearsing and paraphrasing facts; accepts fragmentary understanding.
Intertext-model construction	Complex: Mistrusts and downplays information from simplifying sources. Simple: Trusts and gives prominence to simplifying sources.	Tentative and evolving: Defines task as exploring different sources; aims at understanding different perspectives; pays attention to uncertainties, and establishes source-content and source-source links; accepts understanding of breadth and diversity; uses argument schema.	Transmitted by experts: Defines task as understanding experts’ views; realizes (or overestimates) need for external resources; pays attention to relevant source characteristics; distinguishes more or less trustworthy sources; establishes source-content links; accepts overview of expert knowledge.	Adaptive: Corroborates to evaluate sources; pays more attention to document sources. Maladaptive: Corroborates less to evaluate sources; pays less attention to document sources.
		Certain: Defines task as finding true answer; aims at reproducing indisputable solution; searches for truth in single source and avoids reading more when this is located; accepts identification of correct information.	Constructed by self: Defines task as forming (or confirming) own view; underestimates need for external resources; relies less on external resources; pays less attention to source content and more to own opinion; fails to distinguish more or less trustworthy sources; accepts own opinion.
Note. Adaptive beliefs on the justification dimension indicate beliefs in the need to justify knowledge claims through reason, rules of inquiry, and the evaluation and integration of multiple sources; maladaptive beliefs on this dimension indicate beliefs in justification through own opinion, firsthand experience, and common sense.