FROM COVERT PROCESSES TO OVERT OUTCOMES OF REFUTATION TEXT READING: THE INTERPLAY OF SCIENCE TEXT STRUCTURE AND WORKING MEMORY CAPACITY THROUGH EYE FIXATIONS

International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education

Volumn 12, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 493-523

  Ariasi, Nicola ^a   Mason, Lucia ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

Author keywords

eye movements; reading comprehension; refutation text; science text; working memory capacity

Indexed keywords

EID: 84901979066     PISSN: 15710068     EISSN: 15731774     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10763-013-9494-9     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Alexander, P. A. & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 285-310). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2. Alloway, T. P., Banner, G. E. & Smith, P. (2010). Working memory and cognitive style in adolescents' attainment. British Journal of Education Psychology, 80, 567-581.
3. 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.
4. Baddeley, A. & Hitch, G. J. (1974). Working memory. In G. Bower (Ed.), Recent advances in learning and motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 47-89). New York: Academic Press.
5. Broughton, S. H., Sinatra, G. M. & Reynolds, R. E. (2010). The nature of the refutation text effect: An investigation of attention allocation. Journal of Educational Research, 103, 407-423.
6. Burton, C. & Daneman, M. (2007). Compensating for a limited working memory capacity during reading: Evidence from eye movements. Reading Psychology, 28, 163-186.
7. Chambliss, M. J. (2002). The characteristics of well-designed science textbooks. In J. Otero, J. Leön & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 51-72). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
8. Chi, M. T. H., Slotta, J. D. & de Leeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Learning and Instruction, 4, 27-43.
9. Chinn, C. A. & Brewer, W. F. (1998). An empirical text of a taxonomy of responses to anomalous data in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 623-654.
10. Chinn, C. A. & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Children's responses to anomalous scientific data: How is conceptual change impeded? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 327-343.
11. Cromley, J. G. (2009). Reading achievement and science proficiency: International comparisons from the Programme on International Student Assessment. Reading Psychology, 30, 89-116.
12. Cromley, J. G., Snyder-Hogan, L. E. & Luciw-Dubas, U. A. (2010). Reading comprehension of scientific text: A domain-specific test of the direct and inferential mediation model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 687-700.
13. Daneman, M. & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450-466.
14. Daneman, M. & Merikle, P. M. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 3, 422-443.
15. Diakidoy, I. N., Mouskounti, T. & Ioannides, C. (2011). Comprehension and learning from refutation and expository texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 46, 22-38.
16. Dole, J. A. & Sinatra, G. M. (1998). Reconceptualizing change in the cognitive construction of knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 33, 109-128.
17. Defrancesco, S. & Oss, M. (2006). Scoprire la fisica quotidiana [Discovering everyday physics] Trento. Italy: Erickson.
18. 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, 335-356.
19. Fox, E. (2009). The role of reader characteristics in processing and learning from informational text. Review of Educational Research, 79, 202-300.
20. Gernsbacher, M. A., Varner, K. R. & Faust, M. E. (1990). Investigating differences in general comprehension skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 430-445.
21. Graesser, A. C., Leon, J. A. & Otero, J. (2002). Introduction to the psychology of science text comprehension. In J. Otero, J. A. Leon & A. C. Graeeser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 1-15). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
22. 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, 117-159.
23. Härtel, H. (2000). The tides-A neglected topic. Physics Education, 35, 40-45.
24. Hynd, C. (1998). Conceptual change in a high school physics class. In B. Guzzetti & C. Hynd (Eds.), Perspectives on conceptual change (pp. 27-36). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
25. Hynd, C. (2001). Refutational text and the change process. International Journal of Educational Research, 35, 699-714.
26. Hynd, C., Qian, G., Ridgeway, V. & Pickle, M. (1991). Promoting conceptual change with science texts and discussion. Journal of Reading, 34, 596-601.
27. Hyönä, J. & Lorch, R. F. (2004). Effects of topic headings on text processing: Evidence from adult readers' eye fixation patterns. Learning and Instruction, 14, 131-152.
28. Hyönä, J. & Nurminen, A.-M. (2006). Do adult readers know how they read? Evidence from eye movement patterns and verbal reports. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 31-50.
29. Hyönä, J., Lorch, R. F. & Kaakinen, J. (2002). Individual differences in reading to summarize expository text: Evidence from eye fixation patterns. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 44-55.
30. Just, M. A. & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329-354.
31. Just, M. A. & Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99, 122-149.
32. Kaakinen, J., Hyönä, J. & Keenan, J. (2003). How prior knowledge, WMC, and relevance of information affect eye fixation in expository text. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 3, 447-457.
33. Kendeou, P., Muis, K. R. & Fulton, S. (2011). Reader and text factors in reading comprehension processes. Journal of Research in Reading, 3, 1-19.
34. Kendeou, P. & van den Broek, P. (2005). The effects of readers' misconceptions on comprehension of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 235-245.
35. Kendeou, P. & van den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory and Cognition, 35, 1567-1577.
36. Kerlinger, F. N. & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research (4th ed.). Forth Worth: Harcourt.
37. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38. Limón, M. (2001). On the cognitive conflict as an instructional strategy for conceptual change: A critical appraisal. Learning and Instruction, 11, 357-380.
39. Lorch, R. F. & Lorch, E. P. (1996). Effects of organizational signals on free recall of expository text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 38-48.
40. Mason, L. & Gava, M. (2007). Effects of epistemological beliefs and learning text structure on conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou, A. Baltas & X. Vamvakoussi (Eds.), Reframing the conceptual change approach in learning and instruction (pp. 165-196). Oxford: Elsevier.
41. 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.
42. Mason, L., Tornatora, M. C. & Pluchino, P. (2013). Do fourth graders integrate text and picture in processing and learning from an illustrated science text? Evidence from eye-movement patterns. Computers & Education, 60, 95-109.
43. McNamara, D. S. & Kintsch, W. (1996). Learning from texts: Effects of prior knowledge and text coherence. Discourse Processes, 22, 247-288.
44. Mikkilä-Erdmann, M. (2001). Improving conceptual change concerning photosynthesis through text design. Learning and Instruction, 11, 241-257.
45. Mikkilä-Erdmann, M., Penttinen, M., Anto, E. & Olkinuora, E. (2008). Problems of constructing mental models during learning from science text. Eye tracking methodology meets conceptual change. In Understanding models for learning and instruction: Essays in honor of Norbert M. Seel (pp. 63-79). New York: Routledge.
46. Murphy, P. K. (2001). What makes a text persuasive? Comparing students' and experts' conceptions of persuasiveness. International Journal of Educational Research, 35, 675-698.
47. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw Hill.
48. Pazzaglia, F., Palladino, P. & De Beni, R. (2000). Presentazione di uno strumento per la valutazione della memoria di lavoro verbale e sua relazione con i disturbi della comprensione [An instrument for the assessment of verbal working memory and of its relation with comprehension difficulties]. Psicologia Clinica dello Sviluppo, 3, 465-486.
49. Qian, G. & Pan, J. (2002). A comparison of epistemological beliefs and learning from science text between American and Chinese high school students. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology. The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 365-385). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
50. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422.
51. Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1457-1506.
52. She, H.-C. & Chen, Y.-Z. (2009). The impact of multimedia effect on science learning: Evidence from eye movements. Computers & Education, 53, 1297-1307.
53. Sinatra, G. M. & Broughton, S. W. (2011). Bridging reading comprehension and conceptual change in science education: The promise of refutation text. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(4), 374-393.
54. Tippett, C. D. (2010). Refutational text in science education. A review of two decades of research. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 951-970.
55. Tsai, M.-J., Hou, H.-T., Lai, M.-L., Liu, W.-Y. & Yang, F.-Y. (2012). Visual attention for solving multiple-choice science problem: An eye-tracking analysis. Computers & Education, 58, 375-385.
56. van den Broek, P. W. (2010). Using texts in science education: Cognitive processes and knowledge representation. Science, 328(5977), 453-456.
57. 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.
58. van Gog, T. & Scheiter, K. (2010). Eye tracking as a tool to study and enhance multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 20, 95-99.
59. Veenman, M. V. J., van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1, 3-14.
60. Viiri, J. (1999). Tides in textbooks, expert teachers' ideas and students' understanding. In M. Komorek et al. (Eds.), Research in science education: Past, present and future. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference of the European Science Education Research Association, Kiel, Germany.
61. Viiri, J. (2000). Students' understanding of tides. Physics Education, 35, 100-105.
62. vonHecker, U. & Dutke, S. (2004). Integrative social perception: Individuals low in working memory benefit more from external representations. Social Cognition, 22, 336-365.
63. Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45-69.
64. Vosniadou, S. (Ed.). (2013). International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 377-394). New York: Routledge.