Text-belief consistency effect in adolescents´ comprehension of multiple documents from the Web (El efecto de consistencia en la comprensión lectora de los adolescentes de documentos múltiples provenientes de Internet)

References / Referencias

• Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Amstad, T. (1978). Wie verständlich sind unsere Zeitungen? [How understandable are our newspapers?] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Zürich, Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, R. C., & Pichert, J. W. (1978). Recall of previously unrecallable information following a shift in perspective. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Anmarkrud, Ø., Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2014). Multiple-documents literacy: Strategic processing, source awareness, and argumentation when reading multiple conflicting documents. Learning and Individual Differences, 30, 64–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beker, K., van den Broek, P., & Jolles, D. (2018). Children’s integration of information across texts: Reading processes and knowledge representations. Reading and Writing, online first, 1–25. doi:10.1007/s11145-018-9879-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blanc, N., Kendeou, P., van den Broek, P., & Brouillet, D. (2008). Updating situation models during reading of news reports: Evidence from empirical data and simulations. Discourse Processes, 45, 103–121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braasch, J. L. G., & Bråten, I. (2017). The discrepancy-induced source comprehension (D-ISC) model: Basic assumptions and preliminary evidence. Educational Psychologist, 52, 167–181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bråten, I., Anmarkrud, Ø., Brandmo, C., & Strømsø, H. I. (2014). Developing and testing a model of direct and indirect relationships between individual differences, processing, and multiple-text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 30, 9–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63, 1–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
   Google Scholar
• Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Isberner, M.-B., & Richter, T. (2014). Comprehension and validation: Separable stages of information processing? A case for epistemic monitoring in language comprehension. In D.N. Rapp, & J. Braasch (Eds.), Processing inaccurate information: Theoretical and applied perspectives from cognitive science and the educational sciences (pp. 245–276). Boston, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, H. M., & Seifert, C. M. (1994). Sources of the continued influence effect: When misinformation in memory affects later inferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 1420–1436.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kendeou, P., & O’Brien, E. J. (2014). The knowledge revision components (KReC) framework: Processes and mechanisms. In D. N. Rapp, & J. L. G. Braasch (Eds.), Processing inaccurate information: Theoretical and applied perspectives from cognitive science and the educational sciences (pp. 353–377). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163–182.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363–394.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Limon, M., & Mason, L. (2002). Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Maier, J., & Richter, T. (2013). Text-belief consistency effects in the comprehension of multiple texts with conflicting information. Cognition and Instruction, 31, 151–175.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maier, J., & Richter, T. (2014). Fostering multiple text comprehension: How metacognitive strategies and motivation moderate the text-belief consistency effect. Metacognition & Learning, 9, 54–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maier, J., Richter, T., & Britt, M. A. (2018). Cognitive processes underlying the text-belief consistency effect: An eye-movement study. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32, 171–185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, L., & Boscolo, P. (2004). Role of epistemological understanding and interest in interpreting a controversy and in topic-specific belief change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 103–128. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCrudden, M. T., & Barnes, A. (2016). Differences in student reasoning about belief-relevant arguments: A mixed methods study. Metacognition and Learning, 11, 275–303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCrudden, M. T., & Sparks, P. C. (2014). Exploring the effect of task instructions on topic beliefs and topic belief justifications: A mixed methods study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39, 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2013.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175–220.
   Google Scholar
• Perfetti, C. A., Rouet, J. F., & Britt, M. A. (1999). Toward a theory of documents representation. In H. van Oostendorp, & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 99–122). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Richter, T. (2007). Wie analysiert man Interaktionen von metrischen und kategorialen Prädiktoren? Nicht mit Median-Splits! [How to analyze interactions of metric and categorical predictors: Not with median-splits!]. Zeitschrift für Medienpsychologie, 19, 116–125.
   Google Scholar
• Richter, T. (2015). Validation and comprehension of text information: Two sides of the same coin. Discourse Processes, 52, 337–355.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richter, T., & Maier, J. (2017). Comprehension of multiple documents with conflicting information: A two-step model of validation. Educational Psychologist, 52, 148–166.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross, L., Lepper, M. R., & Hubbard, M. (1975). Perseverance in self-perception and social perception: Biased attributional processes in the debriefing paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 880–892.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rouet, J.-F., & Britt, M. A. (2011). Relevance processes in multiple document comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 19–52). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Rouet, J. F., Britt, M. A., & Durik, A. M. (2017). RESOLV: Readers’ representation of reading contexts and tasks. Educational Psychologist, 50, 200–215. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2017.1329015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scharrer, L., Rupieper, Y., Stadtler, M., & Bromme, R. (2017). When science becomes too easy: Science popularization inclines laypeople to underrate their dependence on experts. Public Understanding of Science, 26, 1003–1018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmalhofer, F., & Glavanov, D. (1986). Three components of understanding a programmer’s manual: Verbatim, propositional, and situational representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 279–294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schroeder, S., Richter, T., & Hoever, I. (2008). Getting a picture that is both accurate and stable: Situation models and epistemic validation. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 237–259.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singer, M. (2013). Validation in reading comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 361–366. doi:10.1177/0963721413495236
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Staatsinstitut für Schulqualität und Bildungsforschung. (2018). Geo10 Lernbereich 7: Klimawandel als globale Herausforderung [Geo10 study area 7: Global warming as global challenge]. Retrieved from https://www.lehrplanplus.bayern.de/fachlehrplan/lernbereich/50409
   Google Scholar
• van den Broek, P., Beker, K., & Oudega, M. (2015). Inference generation in text comprehension: Automatic and strategic processes in the construction of a mental representation. In E. J. O’Brien, A. E. Cook, & R. F. Lorch (Eds.), Inferences during reading (pp. 94–121). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• van Strien, J. L. H., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Boshuizen, H. P. A. (2014). Dealing with conflicting information from multiple nonlinear texts: Effects of prior attitudes. Computers in Human Behavior, 32, 101–111. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiley, J. (2005). A fair and balanced look at the news: What affects memory for controversial arguments? Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 95–109.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe, M. B. W., & Goldman, S. R. (2005). Relations between adolescents’ text processing and reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 23, 467–502.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe, M. B. W., Tanner, S. M., & Taylor, A. (2013). Processing and representation of arguments in on-sided texts about disputed topics. Discourse Processes, 50, 457–497.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar