Exploring the link between cognitive processes and learning from refutational text

Journal of Research in Reading

Volumn 37, Issue SUPPL1, 2014, Pages

  Mccrudden, Matthew ^a   Kendeou, Panayiota ^b  

^a VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON   (New Zealand)

^b NEAPOLIS UNIVERSITY PAFOS   (Cyprus)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84896313575     PISSN: 01410423     EISSN: 14679817     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2011.01527.x     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Afflerbach, P. (2002). Verbal reports and protocol analysis. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research. (Vol. III, pp. 87-103). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Alvermann, D.E. & Hague, S.A. (1989). Comprehension of counterintuitive science text: Effects of prior knowledge and text structure. Journal of Educational Research, 82(4), 197-202.
3. Alvermann, D.E. & Hynd, C.R. (1989). Effects of prior knowledge activation modes and text structure on non-science majors' comprehension of physics. Journal of Educational Research, 83(2), 97-102.
4. Ariasi, N. & Mason, L. (2011). Uncovering the effect of text structure in learning from a science text: An eye-tracking study. Instructional Science, 39, 581-601. doi:10.1007/s11251-010-9142-5.
5. Azevedo, R. & Cromley, J.G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students' learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 523-535. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.523.
6. Braasch, J.L.G. & Goldman, S.R. (2010). The role of prior knowledge in learning from analogies in science texts. Discourse Processes, 47, 447-479. doi:10.1080/01638530903420960.
7. Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books, MIT Press.
8. Chambliss, M.J. (2002). The characteristics of well-designed science textbooks. In J. Otero, J.A. Leon & A.C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension. (pp. 1-15). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9. Chi, M.T.H. (1992). Conceptual change in and across ontological categories: Examples from learning and discovery in science. In R. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive models of science. (pp. 129-160). Minneapolis. MN: University of Minnesota Press.
10. Chi, M.T.H. (2000). Self-explaining expository texts: The dual processes of generating inferences and repairing mental models. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology. (pp. 161-238). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11. Chi, M.T.H. (2005). Common sense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14, 161-199. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1402_1.
12. Chi, M.T.H. (2008). Three types of conceptual change: Belief revision, mental model transformation, and categorical shift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), Handbook of research on conceptual change. (pp. 61-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. 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.
14. Chinn, C. A. & Brewer, W.F. (1998). An empirical test of a taxonomy of responses to anomalous data in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 623-654. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199808).
15. Chinn, C.A. & Malhotra, B.A. (2002). Children's responses to anomalous scientific data: How is conceptual change impeded? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 327-343. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.94.2.327.
16. Coté, N. & Goldman, S.R. (1999). Building representations of informational text: Evidence from children's think-aloud protocols. In H. van Oostendorp & S.R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading. (pp. 169-193). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. Creswell, J.W. (2005). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
18. Creswell, J.W. & Plano Clark, V.L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
19. Diakidoy, I.N., Kendeou, P. & Ioannides, C. (2003). Reading about energy: The effects of text structure in science learning and conceptual change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(3), 335-356. doi:10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00039-5.
20. DiSessa, A.A. (1993). Towards an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2-3), 105-225.
21. DiSessa, A.A. & Minstrell, J. (1998). Cultivating conceptual change with benchmark lessons. In J.G. Greeno & S.V. Goldman (Eds.), Thinking practices in mathematics & science learning. (pp. 155-187). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
22. Dole, J.A. (2000). Readers, texts, and conceptual change. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 16, 99-118. doi:10.1080/105735600277980.
23. Ericsson, K.A. & Simon, H.A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24. Fletcher, C.R. (1986). Strategies for the allocation of short-term memory during comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 25(1), 43-58. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(86)90020-3.
25. Gay, T. (2005). The physics of football. New York: HarperCollins.
26. Goldman, S.R. & Varma, S. (1995). CAPing the construction-integration model of discourse comprehension. In C.A. Weaver, S. Mannes & C.R. Fletcher (Eds.), Discourse comprehension: Essays in honor of Walter Kintsch. (pp. 337-358). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Graesser, A.C., McNamara, D.S. & VanLehn, K. (2005). Scaffolding deep comprehension strategies through Point & Query, AutoTutor, and iSTART. Educational Psychologist, 40, 225-234. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4004_4.
28. Graesser, A.C., Singer, M. & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101(3), 371-395. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.101.3.371.
29. Guzzetti, B.J. (2000). Learning counter-intuitive science concepts: What have we learned from over a decade of research? Reading and Writing Quarterly, 16, 89-98. doi:10.1080/105735600277971.
30. Guzzetti, B.J., Snyder, T.E., Glass, G.V. & Gamas, W.S. (1993). Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 116-159. doi:10.2307/747886.
31. Guzzetti, B.J., Williams, W.O., Skeels, S.A. & Wu, S.M. (1997). Influence of text structure on learning counterintuitive physics concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(7), 701-719. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736.
32. Hynd, C.E. (2001). Refutational texts and the change process. International Journal of Educational Research, 35(7-8), 699-714. doi:10.1016/S0883-0355(02)00010-1.
33. Hynd, C.R., McWhorter, J.Y., Phares, V.L. & Suttles, C.W. (1994). The role of instructional variables in conceptual change in high school physics topics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 933-946. doi:10.1002/tea.3660310908.
34. Igo, L.B., Bruning, R.H. & Riccomini, P.J. (2009). Should middle school students with learning problems copy and paste notes from the Internet? Mixed methods evidence of study barriers. Research on Middle Level Education Online, 33, 1-10.
35. Johnson, B. & Christensen, L. (2008). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. (3rd edn). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
36. Kaiser, M.K., Proffitt, D.R. & McCloskey, M. (1985). The development of beliefs about falling objects. Perception and Psychophysics, 38, 533-539.
37. Kendeou, P., Muis, K.R. & Fulton, S. (2011). Reader and text factors in reading comprehension processes. Journal of Research in Reading, 34(4), 365-383. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01436.x.
38. Kendeou, P. & van den Broek, P. (2005). The role of readers' misconceptions on comprehension of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 235-245. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.235.
39. Kendeou, P. & van den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory & Cognition, 35(7), 1567-1577. doi:10.3758/BF03193491.
40. 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.
41. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42. Magliano, J.P. & Graesser, A.C. (1991). A three-pronged method for studying inference generation in literary text. Poetics, 20(3), 193-232. doi:10.1016/0304-422X(91)90007-C.
43. Magliano, J.P. & Millis, K.K. (2003). Assessing reading skill with a think-aloud procedure. Cognition and Instruction, 21(3), 251-283. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI2103_02.
44. Magliano, J.P., Trabasso, T. & Graesser, A.C. (1999). Strategic processes during comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 615-629. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.4.615.
45. Maria, K. & MacGinitie, W. (1987). Learning from texts that refute the reader's prior knowledge. Reading Research and Instruction, 26(4), 222-238.
46. Mason, L., Gava, M. & Boldrin, A. (2008). On warm conceptual change: The interplay of text, epistemological beliefs, and topic interest. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 291-309. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.291.
47. McCloskey, M. (1983). Naïve theories of motion. In D. Gentner & A.L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models. (pp. 299-324). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
48. McNamara, D.S. & Magliano, J.P. (2009). Towards a comprehensive model of comprehension. In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation. (Vol. 51, pp. 297-384). New York: Elsevier Science.
49. Murphy, P.K. & Mason, L. (2006). Changing knowledge and changing beliefs. In P.A. Alexander & P. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology. (pp. 305-324). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
50. O'Brien, E.J., Cook, A.E. & Guéraud, S. (2010). Accessibility of outdated information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 36(4), 979-991. doi:10.1037/a0019763.
51. O'Brien, E.J., Rizzella, M.L., Albrecht, J.E. & Halleran, J.G. (1998). Updating a situation model: A memory-based text processing view. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 24(5), 1200-1210. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.24.5.1200.
52. Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P. & Gertzog, W. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-227. doi:10.1002/sce.3730660207.
53. Shank, G.D. (2006). Qualitative research: A personal skills approach. (2nd edn). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
54. Tippett, C.D. (2010). Refutation text in science education: A review of two decades of research. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 951-970. doi:10.1007/s10763-010-9203-x.
55. Trabasso, T. & Magliano, J.P. (1996). Conscious understanding during comprehension. Discourse Processes, 21(3), 255-287. doi:10.1080/01638539609544959.
56. Trabasso, T. & Suh, S. (1993). Understanding text: Achieving explanatory coherence through on-line inferences and mental operations in working memory. Discourse Processes, 16(1-2), 3-34. doi: 10.1080/01638539309544827.
57. Van den Broek, P. (1994). Comprehension and memory of narrative texts: Inferences and coherence. In M.A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics. (pp. 539-588). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
58. Van den Broek, P. & Kendeou, P. (2008). Cognitive processes in comprehension of science texts: The role of co-activation in confronting misconceptions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 335-351. doi:10.1002/acp.1418.
59. Van den Broek, P., Rapp, D.N. & Kendeou, P. (2005). Integrating memory-based and constructionist processes in accounts of reading comprehension. Discourse Processes, 39(2-3), 299-316. doi:10.1207/s15326950dp3902&3_11.
60. Van den Broek, P., Risden, K., Fletcher, C.R. & Thurlow, R. (1996). A 'landscape' view of reading: Fluctuating patterns of activation and the construction of a stable memory representation. In B.K. Britton & A.C. Graesser (Eds.), Models of understanding text. (pp. 165-187). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
61. Van den Broek, P., Young, M., Tzeng, Y. & Linderholm, T. (1999). The Landscape model of reading: Inferences and the online construction of memory representation. In H. van Oosterndorp & S.R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading. (pp. 71-98). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
62. Vosniadou, S. (Ed.) (2008). International handbook for research on conceptual change. New York: Routledge.
63. Vosniadou, S. & Brewer, W.F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24(4), 535-585. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(92)90018-W.
64. Vosniadou, S. & Brewer, W.F. (1994). Mental models of the day/night cycle. Cognitive Science, 18(1), 123-183. doi:10.1016/0364-0213(94)90022-1.
65. Wang, T. & Andre, T. (1991). Conceptual change text versus traditional text and application questions versus no questions in learning about electricity. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16(4), 103-116. doi:10.1016/0361-476X(91)90011-9.
66. Zwaan, R.A. & Brown, C.M. (1996). The influence of language prof ciency and comprehension skill on situation-model construction. Discourse Processes, 21(3), 289-327. doi:10.1080/01638539609544960.
67. Zwaan, R.A. & Singer, M. (2003). Text comprehension. In A.C. Graesser, M.A. Gernsbacher & S.R. Goldman (Eds.), Handbook of discourse processes. (pp. 83-121). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.