Identifying fake news through trustworthiness judgements of documents / La identificación de noticias falsas mediante juicios de fiabilidad de los documentos

References / Referencias

• Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. In L. M. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Vol. III (pp. 285–310). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Anmarkrud, Ø., & Bråten, I. (2009). Motivation for reading comprehension. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 252–256.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boscolo, P., & Mason, L. (2003). Topic knowledge, text coherence, and interest: How they interact in learning from instructional texts. The Journal of Experimental Education, 71, 126–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bråten, I., Britt, M. A., Strømsø, H. I., & Rouet, J.-F. (2011). The role of epistemic beliefs in the comprehension of multiple expository texts: Toward an integrated model. Educational Psychologist, 46, 48–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bråten, I., Ferguson, L. E., Anmarkrud, Ø., & Strømsø, H. I. (2013). Prediction of learning and comprehension when adolescents read multiple texts: The roles of word-level processing, strategic approach, and reading motivation. Reading and Writing, 26, 321–348.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bråten, I., Salmerón, L., & Strømsø, H. I. (2016). Who said that? Investigating the plausibility-induced source focusing assumption with Norwegian undergraduate readers. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 46, 253–262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2011). Measuring strategic processing when students read multiple texts. Metacognition and Learning, 6, 111–130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Britt, M. A. (2009). Trust matters: Examining the role of source evaluation in students’ construction of meaning within and across multiple texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 44, 6–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Salmerón, L. (2011). Trust and mistrust when students read multiple information sources about climate change. Learning and Instruction, 21, 180–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brites, M. J. (2017). Digital literacy and education: Country reports. Retrieved from https://www.is1401eln.eu/en/gca/index.php?id=149
   Google Scholar
• Britt, M. A., & Rouet, J.-F. (2012). Learning with multiple documents: Component skills and their acquisition. In J. R. Kirby, & M. J. Lawson (Eds.), Enhancing the quality of learning: Dispositions, instruction, and learning processes (pp. 276–314). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• De Keersmaecker, J., & Roets, A. (2017). ‘Fake news’: Incorrect, but hard to correct. The role of cognitive ability on the impact of false information on social impressions. Intelligence, 65, 107–110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerjets, P., Kammerer, Y., & Werner, B. (2011). Measuring spontaneous and instructed evaluation processes during Web search: Integrating concurrent thinking-aloud protocols and eye-tracking data. Learning and Instruction, 21, 220–231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaznieks, A., Scarcelli, C. M., & Murru, M. F. (2006). Digital literacy and education. Report by Country: Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Jang, S. M., & Kim, J. K. (2018). Third person effects of fake news: Fake news regulation and media literacy interventions. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 295–302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kammerer, Y., Amann, D. G., & Gerjets, P. (2015). When adults without university education search the Internet for health information: The roles of Internet-specific epistemic beliefs and a source evaluation intervention. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 297–309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., & Cook, J. (2017). Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the “Post-Truth” era. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6, 353–369.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• List, A., & Alexander, P. A. (2017). Cognitive affective engagement model of multiple source use. Educational Psychologist, 52, 182–199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• List, A., Grossnickle, E. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2016). Undergraduate students’ justifications for source selection in a digital academic context. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54, 22–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lucisano, P., & Piemontese, M. E. (1988). GULPEASE: una formula per la predizione della difficoltà dei testi in lingua italiana (en. tr. GULPEASE: a formula to predict the difficulty of texts in Italian). Scuola eCittà, 3, 110–124.
   Google Scholar
• Maier, J., & Richter, T. (2012). 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 and Learning, 9, 51–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca. (2012). Indicazioni Nazionali per il curriculo della scuola dell’infanzia e del primo ciclo d’istruzione. [National directions for the curriculum of pre-schools and primary schools]. Gazetta Ufficiale della Republica Italiana 154, 30, 3–77. Retrieved from http://www.indicazioninazionali.it/documenti_Indicazioni_nazionali/DM_254_201_G U.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Richter, T., & Maier, J. (2017). Comprehension of multiple documents with conflicting information: A two-step model of validation. Educational Psychologist, 1–19. doi:10.1080/00461520.2017.1322968
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richter, T., & Maier, J. (2018). The role of validation in multiple-document comprehension. In J. L. G. Braasch, I. Bråten, & M. T. McCrudden (Eds.), Handbook of multiple source use (pp. 151–167). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schiefele, U. (1999). Interest and learning from text. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 257–279.
   Google Scholar
• Stanovich, K. E., West, R. F., & Toplak, M. E. (2016). The rationality quotient: Toward a test of rational thinking. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Strømsø, H. I., Bråten, I., & Britt, M. A. (2010). Reading multiple texts about climate change: The relationship between memory for sources and text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 20, 192–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strømsø, H. I., Bråten, I., Britt, M. A., & Ferguson, L. E. (2013). Spontaneous sourcing among students reading multiple documents. Cognition and Instruction, 31, 176–203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tarchi, C. (2015). Fostering reading comprehension of expository texts through the activation of readers ’ prior knowledge and inference-making skills. International Journal of Educational Research, 72, 80–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tarchi, C. (2017). Comprehending and recalling from text: The role of motivational and cognitive factors. Issues in Educational Research, 27(3). Retrieved from http://iier.org.au/iier27/tarchi.html
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wineburg, S. (1991). Historical problem solving: A study of the cognitive processes used in the evaluation of documentary and pictorial evidence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 73–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Medical Association. (2013). Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Fortaleza. Retrieved from http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/index.html
   Google Scholar