Comprehension, Diagram Analysis, Integration, and Interest: A Cross-Sectional Analysis

References

• Afflerbach, P., & Cho, B. Y. (2009). Identifying and describing constructively responsive comprehension strategies in new and traditional forms of reading. Handbook of research on reading comprehension, 69–90.
   Google Scholar
• Afflerbach, P., Hurt, M., & Cho, B. Y. (2020). Reading comprehension strategy instruction. In D.L. Dinsmore, L.K. Fryer, & M.M. Parkinson (Eds.), Handbook of strategies and strategic processing (pp. 98–118). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ainley, M., Hidi, S., & Berndorff, D. (2002). Interest, learning, and the psychological processes that mediate their relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 545–561. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.545
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183–198. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.03.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ainsworth, S. (2008). The educational value of multiple-representations when learning complex scientific concepts. In Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (pp. 191–208 Springer, Dordrecht.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander, P. A. (2005). The path to competence: A lifespan developmental perspective on reading. Journal of Literacy Research, 37(4), 413–436. doi:10.1207/s15548430jlr3704_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, P. A The Disciplined Reading and Learnin., The Disciplined Reading and Learning Research Laboratory (2012). Reading into the future: Competence for the 21st century. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 259–280. doi:10.1080/00461520.2012.722511
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, P. A., Schallert, D. L., & Hare, V. C. (1991). Coming to terms: How researchers in learning and literacy talk about knowledge. Review of Educational Research, 61(3), 315–343. doi:10.3102/00346543061003315
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almasi, J. F. (1996). A new view of discussion. In L. B. Gambrell, & J. F. Almasi (Eds.), Lively discussions! Fostering engaged reading (pp. 2–24) International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• Alspaugh, J. W. (1998). Achievement loss associated with the transition to middle school and high school. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(1), 20–25. doi:10.1080/00220679809597572
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barzilai, S., Zohar, A. R., & Mor-Hagani, S. (2018). Promoting integration of multiple texts: A review of instructional approaches and practices. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 973–999. doi:10.1007/s10648-018-9436-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Best, R. M., Floyd, R. G., & McNamara, D. S. (2008). Differential competencies contributing to children’s comprehension of narrative and expository texts. Reading Psychology, 29(2), 137–164. doi:10.1080/02702710801963951
   Google Scholar
• Britt, M. A., & Aglinskas, C. (2002). Improving students’ ability to identify and use source information. Cognition and Instruction, 20(4), 485–522. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI2004_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Britt, M. A., Rouet, J. F., & Braasch, J. L. (2012). Documents as entities: Extending the situation model theory of comprehension. In Reading-from words to multiple texts (pp. 174–193). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Butcher, K. R. (2006). Learning from text with diagrams: Promoting mental model development and inference generation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 182–197. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.182
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chall, J. S., Jacobs, V. A., & Baldwin, L. E. (1990). The reading crisis: Why poor children fall behind. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Common Core State Standards Initiative (2017). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers and National Governors Association. Retrieved from. http://www.corestandards.org.
   Google Scholar
• Coté, N., Goldman, S. R., & Saul, E. U. (1998). Students making sense of informational text: Relations between processing and representation. Discourse Processes, 25(1), 1–53. doi:10.1080/01638539809545019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cromley, J. G., Perez, T. C., Fitzhugh, S. L., Newcombe, N. S., Wills, T. W., & Tanaka, J. C. (2013). Improving students’ diagram comprehension with classroom instruction. The Journal of Experimental Education, 81(4), 511–537. doi:10.1080/00220973.2012.745465
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cromley, J. G., Snyder-Hogan, L. E., & Luciw-Dubas, U. A. (2010). Cognitive activities in complex science text and diagrams. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(1), 59–74. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cromley, J. G., Kunze, A. J., & Dane, A. P. (2021). Multi-text multi-modal reading processes and comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 71, 101413. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101413
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dole, J. A., Valencia, S. W., Greer, E. A., & Wardrop, J. L. (1991). Effects of two types of prereading instruction on the comprehension of narrative and expository text. Reading Research Quarterly, 26(2), 142–159. doi:10.2307/747979
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Firetto, C. M., & Van Meter, P. N. (2018). Inspiring integration in college students reading multiple biology texts. Learning and Individual Differences, 65, 123–134. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2018.05.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., & Louwerse, M. M. (2003). What do readers need to learn in order to process coherence relations in narrative and expository text. Rethinking reading comprehension, 82–98.
   Google Scholar
• Guthrie, J. T., Hoa, L. W., Wigfield, A., Tonks, S. M., & Perencevich, K. C. (2005). From spark to fire: Can situational reading interest lead to long‐term reading motivation? Literacy Research and Instruction, 45(2), 91–117.
   Google Scholar
• Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (1999). How motivation fits into a science of reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3(3), 199–205. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr0303_1
   Google Scholar
• Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, Vol. 3 (pp. 403–422). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Barbosa, P., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., Davis, M. H., … Tonks, S. (2004). Increasing reading comprehension and engagement through concept-oriented reading instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 403–423. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.403
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hattan, C., Singer, L. M., Loughlin, S., & Alexander, P. A. (2015). Prior knowledge activation in design and in practice. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 64(1), 478–497. doi:10.1177/2381336915617603
   Google Scholar
• Hattan, C., & Alexander, P. A. (2018). Scaffolding reading comprehension for competent readers. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 67, 1–14. doi:10.1177/2381336918786885
   Google Scholar
• Hattan, C., Alexander, P. A., & Lupo, S. M. (2023). Leveraging what students know to make sense of texts: What the research says about prior knowledge activation. Review of Educational Research. Online first. doi:10.3102/00346543221148478
   Google Scholar
• Hattan, C., & Alexander, P. A. (2021). The effects of knowledge activation training on rural middle school students’ expository text comprehension: A mixed methods study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(5), 879–897. doi:10.1037/edu0000623
   Google Scholar
• Hattan, C., & Lupo, S. M. (2020). Rethinking the role of knowledge in the literacy classroom. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), 283–298. doi:10.1002/rrq.350
   Google Scholar
• Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kendeou, P., Van den Broek, P., White, M. J., & Lynch, J. S. (2009). Predicting reading comprehension in early elementary school: The independent contributions of oral language and decoding skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 765–778. doi:10.1037/a0015956
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiili, C., Bråten, I., Kullberg, N., & Leppänen, P. H. (2020). Investigating elementary school students’ text-based argumentation with multiple online information resources. Computers & Education, 147, 103785. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103785
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163–182. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363–394. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kush, J. C., & Watkins, M. W. (1996). Long-term stability of children’s attitudes toward reading. The Journal of Educational Research, 89(5), 315–319. doi:10.1080/00220671.1996.9941333
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lai, S. A., George Benjamin, R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Kuhn, M. R. (2014). The longitudinal relationship between reading fluency and reading comprehension skills in second-grade children. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 30(2), 116–138. doi:10.1080/10573569.2013.789785
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• List, A., Alexander, P. A., & Stephens, L. A. (2017). Trust but verify: Examining the association between students’ sourcing behaviors and ratings of text trustworthiness. Discourse Processes, 54(2), 83–104.
   Google Scholar
• List, A., & Alexander, P. A. (2017). Cognitive affective engagement model of multiple source use. Educational Psychologist, 52(3), 182–199.
   Google Scholar
• Lupo, S. M., Berry, A., Thacker, E., Sawyer, A., & Merritt, J. (2020). Rethinking text sets to support knowledge building and interdisciplinary learning. The Reading Teacher, 73(4), 513–524. doi:10.1002/trtr.1869
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupo, S. M., Tortorelli, L., Invernizzi, M., Ryoo, J. H., & Strong, J. Z. (2019). An exploration of text difficulty and knowledge support on adolescents’ comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 54(4), 457–479. doi:10.1002/rrq.247
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manzo, A. V., & Casale, U. P. (1985). Listen-Read-Discuss: A content reading heuristic. Journal of Reading, 28(8), 732–734.
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy, K. S., & McNamara, D. S. (2021). The multidimensional knowledge in text comprehension framework. Educational Psychologist, 56(3), 196–214. doi:10.1080/00461520.2021.1872379
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKenna, M. C., Kear, D. J., & Ellsworth, R. A. (1995). Children’s attitudes toward reading: A national survey. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), 934–956. doi:10.2307/748205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNamara, D. S., Ozuru, Y., & Floyd, R. G. (2011). Comprehension Challenges in the Fourth Grade: The Roles of Text Cohesion, Text Genre, and Readers’ Prior Knowledge. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(1), 229–257.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, P. K., Greene, J. A., Firetto, C. M., Hendrick, B. D., Li, M., Montalbano, C., & Wei, L. (2018). Quality talk: Developing students’ discourse to promote high-level comprehension. American Educational Research Journal, 55(5), 1113–1160. doi:10.3102/0002831218771303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Assessment Governing Board (2010). Reading framework for the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Retrieved from http://www.nagb.org/content/nagb/assets/documents/publications/frameworks/reading-2011-framework.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Ogle, D. M. (1986). K-W-L: A teaching model that develops active reading of expository text. The Reading Teacher, 39(6), 564–570. doi:10.1598/RT.39.6.11
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peeck, J., van den Bosch, A. B., & Kreupeling, W. J. (1982). Effect of mobilizing prior knowledge on learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(5), 771–777. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.74.5.771
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P. B., Gaskins, I., Schuder, T., Bergman, J. L., Almasi, J., & Brown, R. (1992). Beyond direct explanation: Transactional instruction of reading comprehension strategies. Elementary School Journal, 92, 511–555.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Renkl, A., & Scheiter, K. (2017). Studying visual displays: How to instructionally support learning. Educational Psychology Review, 29(3), 599–621. doi:10.1007/s10648-015-9340-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiefele, U. (2009). Situational and individual interest. In K.R. Wentzel & D.B. Miele (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 197–222). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schraw, G., Flowerday, T., & Lehman, S. (2001). Increasing situational interest in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 13(3), 211–224. doi:10.1023/A:1016619705184
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwonke, R., Berthold, K., & Renkl, A. (2009). How multiple external representations are used and how they can be made more useful. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(9), 1227–1243. doi:10.1002/acp.1526
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Meter, P., & Stepanik, N. (2020). Interventions to support learning from multiple external representations. In P. Van Meter, A. List, D. Lombardi, & P. Kendeou (Eds.), Handbook of learning from multiple representations and perspectives (pp. 76–91). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• White, T. G., Graves, M. F., & Slater, W. H. (1990). Growth of reading vocabulary in diverse elementary schools: Decoding and word meaning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(2), 281–290. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.2.281
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wigfield, A., Gladstone, J. R., & Turci, L. (2016). Beyond cognition: Reading motivation and reading comprehension. Child Development Perspectives, 10(3), 190–195. doi:10.1111/cdep.12184
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe, M. B., & Goldman, S. R. (2005). Relations between adolescents’ text processing and reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 23(4), 467–502. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2304_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe, M. B., & Mienko, J. A. (2007). Learning and memory of factual content from narrative and expository text. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(Pt 3), 541–564.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar