Referencias

• Anderson, M. C. M. & Thiede, K. W. (2007). Why do delayed summaries improve metacomprehension accuracy? Acta Psychologica, 128, 100–118.
   Google Scholar
• August, D., Flavell, J. & Clift, R. (1984). Comparison of comprehension monitoring of skilled and less skilled readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 20 (1), 39–53.
   Google Scholar
• Cain, K., Oakhill, J. & Bryant, P. (2004). Children's Reading Comprehension Ability: Concurrent Prediction by Working Memory, Verbal Ability, and Component Skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96 (1), 31–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cataldo, M. G. & Oakhill, J. (2000). Why Are Poor Comprehenders Inefficient Searchers? An investigation into the effects of text representation and spatial memory on the ability to locate information in text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92 (4), 791–799.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerdán, R., Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, T., Gilabert, R. & Gil, L. (2009). Impact of question-answering tasks on search processes and reading comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 19 (1), 13–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coté, N., Goldman, S. & Saul, E. (1998). Students making sense of informational text: relations between processing and representation. Discourse Processes, 25 (1), 1–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A. & Middleton, E. L. (2005). What constrains the accuracy of metacomprehension judgments? Testing the transfer-appropriate-monitoring and accessibility hypotheses. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 551–565.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glenberg, A. M. & Epstein, W. (1985). Calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 11, 702–718.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graesser, A. C., & Franklin, S. P. (1990). QUEST: A cognitive model of question answering. Discourse Processes, 13, 279–303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guthrie, J. T. (1988). Locating information in documents: Examination of a cognitive model. Reading Research Quarterly, 23 (2), 178–199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hacker, D. J. (1998). Self-Regulated Comprehension During Normal Reading. En D. J. Hacker, A. C. Graesser & J. Dunlosky (Eds.), Metacognition in Educational Theory and Practice (pp. 165–191). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Hannon, B. & Daneman, M. (2004). Shallow Semantic Processing of Text: An individual-Differences Account. Discourse Processes, 37 (3), 187–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyönä, J., Kaakinen, J. & Lorch, R. F. (2002). Individual differences in reading to summarize expository text: evidence from eye fixation patterns. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94 (1), 44–55.
   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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koriat, A. (1993). How do we know that we know? The accessibility model of the feeling of knowing. Psychological Review, 100, 609–639.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Long, D. & Chong, J. (2001). Comprehension Skill and Global Coherence: A Paradoxical Picture of Poor Comprehenders' Abilities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21 (6), 1424–1429.
   Google Scholar
• Maki, R. H. (1998). Test Predictions over Text Material. En D. J. Hacker, A. C. Graesser & J. Dunlosky (Eds.), Metacognition in Educational Theory and Practice (pp. 117–144). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Maki, R. H. & Berry, S. (1984). Metacomprehension of text material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 10, 663–679.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martínez, T. & Sellés, P. (2002). Read&Answer. Un software para registrar procesos on-line de lectura y contestación a preguntas. Universidad de Valencia.
   Google Scholar
• MINISTERIO DE EDUCACIÓN, CULTURA Y DEPORTE (2004). Aproximación a un modelo de evaluación: El proyecto PISA 2000. Madrid: Inecse.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, T. O. & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. En G. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 125–173). Nueva York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Otero, J. (1997). El conocimiento de la falta de conocimiento de un texto científico. Alambique, 11, 15–22.
   Google Scholar
• Otero, J. (2002). Noticing and fixing difficulties in understanding science texts. En J. Otero, J. A. León & A. Graesser (Eds.), The Psychology of Science Text Comprehension (pp. 281–307). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
   Google Scholar
• Otero, J. & Campanario, J. M. (1990). Comprehension evaluation and regulation in learning from science texts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21 (5), 447–460.
   Google Scholar
• Rayner, K., Chace, K. H., Slattery, T. J. & Ashby, J. (2006). Eye Movements as Reflection of Comprehension Processes in Reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10 (3), 241–255.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rouet, J-F. (2006). Question answering and document search. En J-F. Rouet (Ed.), The skills of document use. From text comprehension to web-based learning (pp. 93–121). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M. & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning from texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95 (1), 66–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vidal-Abarca, E., Gilabert, R. Martínez, T., Selles, P., Abad, N. & Ferrer, C. (2007). TEC. Test de Estrategias de Comprensión. Madrid: ICCE.
   Google Scholar
• Zabrucky, K. & Ratner, H. (1992). Effects of passage type on comprehension monitoring and recall in good and poor readers. Journal of Reading Behaviour. 24 (3), 373–391.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar