Fragile knowledge and conflicting evidence: What effects do contiguity and personal characteristics of museum visitors have on their processing depth?

European Journal of Psychology of Education

Volumn 29, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 215-238

  Grüninger, Rahel ^a   Specht, Inga ^b   Lewalter, Doris ^b   Schnotz, Wolfgang ^a  

^a University of Koblenz Landau   (Germany)

^b TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Conflicting information; Contiguity; Information processing; Museum visitors; Self efficacy; Situational interest

Indexed keywords

EID: 84902374818     PISSN: 02562928     EISSN: 18785174     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10212-013-0195-0     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. 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.
2. Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and Operation of Attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 27-58. (Pubitemid 33705566)
3. Allen, S. (2002). Looking for learning in visitor talk: A methodological exploration. In G. Leinhardt, K. Crowley, & K. Knutson (Eds.), Learning Conversations in Museums (pp. 259-303). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
4. Alvermann, D. E. (1989). Comprehension of counterintuitive science text: Effects of prior knowledge and text structure. The Journal of Educational Research, 82, 197-202.
5. Bråten, I., and Ferguson., L. E., Anmarkrud, Ø. & Strømsø, H. I. (2012). Prediction of learning and comprehension when adolescents read multiple texts: The roles of word-level processing, strategic approach, and reading motivation. Springer Science + Business Media B.V., 1-28. doi:10.1007/s11145-012-9371-x.
6. Britt, M. A., and Perfetti., C. A., Sandak, R., & Rouet, J. F. (1999). Content integration and source separation in learning from multiple texts. In S. R. Goldman, A. C. Graesser, & P. van den Broek (Eds.), Narrative Comprehension, Causality, and Coherence: Essays in Honor of Tom Trabasso (pp. 209-233). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. Britt, M. A., & Rouet, J. F. (2011). Research challenges in the use of multiple documents. Information Design Journal, 19(1), 62-68.
8. Caravita, S., & Halldén, O. (1994). Re-framing the problem of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 89-111.
9. 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, 623-654. (Pubitemid 128459026)
10. Chambers, M. (1990). Beyond "Aha": Motivating museum visitors. In B. Serrell (Ed.), What Research Says About Learning in Science Museums (pp. 10-11). Washington DC: Association of Science-Technology Centers.
11. Conley, A. E., and Pintrich., P. R., Vekiri, I., & Harrison, D. (2004). Changes in epistemological beliefs in elementary science students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 186-204. (Pubitemid 38482772)
12. Denissen, J. J. A., and Zarrett., N. R., & Eccles, J. S. (2007). I like to do it, I'm able, and I know I am: Longitudinal couplings between domain-specific achievement, self-concept, and interest. Child Development, 78, 430-447.
13. Epstein, W., and Glenberg., A. M., & Bradley, M. M. (1984). Coactivation and comprehension: Contribution of text variables to the illusion of knowing. Memory and Cognition, 12, 355-360.
14. Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (Eds.). (2000). Learning from museums. Visitor experiences and the making of meaning. Walnut Creek: AltaMira.
15. Fletcher, C. R., & Bloom, C. P. (1988). Causal reasoning in the comprehension of simple narrative texts. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 235-244.
16. Frenkel-Brunswick, E. (1949). Intolerance of ambiguity as emotional and perceptual personality variable. Journal of Personality, 18, 108-143.
17. Ginns, P. (2006). Integration information: A meta-analysis of the spatial contiguity and temporal contiguity effects. Learning and Instruction, 16, 511-512.
18. Graesser, A. C. (2007). An introduction to strategic reading comprehension. In D. S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading Comprehension Strategies (pp. 3-26). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
19. Graesser, A. C., and Millis., K. K., & Zwaan, R. A. (1997). Discourse comprehension. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 163-189.
20. Grüniger, R., Specht, I., Schnotz, W., & Lewalter, D. (2013). Personale Bedingungen der Verarbeitung von fragilem Wissen in Museen. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 41(1), 2-19.
21. Gutwill, J. P. (2008). Challenging a common assumption of hands-on exhibits. How counterintuitive phenomena can undermine inquiry. Journal of Museum Education, 33, 187-198.
22. Harp, S. F., & Mayer, R. E. (1998). How seductive details do their damage: A theory of cognitive interest in science learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 3, 414-434.
23. Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (Eds.). (1998). Metacognition in Educational Theory and Practice. The Educational Psychology Series. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Hidi, S. (2000). An interest researcher's perspective: The effects of extrinsic and intrinsic factors on motivation. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation. The Search for Optimal Motivation and Performance (pp. 309-339). San Diego: Academic Press.
25. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111-127. (Pubitemid 43841450)
26. Hofer, B. K. (2000). Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 378-405.
27. Isberner, M.-B., Richter, T., Maier, J., Knuth-Herzig, K., Horz, H. & Schnotz, W. (2013). Comprehending conflicting science-related texts: Graphs as plausibility cues. Instructional Science: An International Journal of Learning and Cognition.
28. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental Models. Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (2004). Reflective judgment: Theory and research on the development of epistemic assumptions through adulthood. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 5-18. (Pubitemid 38422905)
30. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Kosslyn, S. M. (1994). Image and Brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32. Krapp, A. (2002). Structural and dynamic aspects of interest development: Theoretical considerations from an ontogenetic perspective. Learning and Instruction, 12, 383-409.
33. Kruglanski, A. W., and Webster., D. M., & Klem, A. (1993). Motivated resistance and openness to persuasion in the presence or absence of prior information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(5), 861-876.
34. Lee, Gyoungho, Park, Sang-Suk, Kim, Jung-Whan, Kwon, Hyeok-Gu, & Kwon, Jae-Sool (1999). The Development of an Instrument for the Measuring Student's Cognitive Conflict Levels. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (Boston, MA, March 28-31, 1999). Korea National University of Education.
35. Lewalter, D., & Geyer, C. (2009). Motivationale Aspekte von schulischen Besuchen in naturwissenschaftlichtechnischen Museen. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 12, 28-44.
36. MacDonald, A. P. (1970). Revised scale for ambiguity tolerance: Reliability and validity. Psychological Reports, 26, 791-798.
37. Maier, J., & Richter, T. (2013). How nonexperts understand conflicting information on social science issues. The role of perceived plausibility and reading goals. Journal of Media Psychology, 25, 14-26.
38. Malone, T. W., & Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning. In R. E. Snow & M. J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, Learning, and Instruction (pp. 223-253). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
39. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
40. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358-368.
41. Niegemann, H. M., Domagk, S., Hessel, S., Hein, A., Hupfer, M. & Zobel, A. (2008). Kompendium multimediales Lernen. Berlin Heidelberg.
42. Noschka-Roos, A. (2001). Bausteine eines besucherorientierten Informationskonzepts. In U. Schwarz & P. Teufel (Hrsg.), Handbuch Museografie und Ausstellungsgestaltung (S. 88-113). Ludwigsburg: avedition.
43. O'Brian, E. J., & Albrecht, J. E. (1991). The role of context in accessing antecedents in text. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 94-102.
44. Øistein, A., McCrudden, M., Bråten, I. & Strømsø, H. I. (2013). Task-oriented reading of multiple documents: online comprehension processes and offline products. Instructional Science: An International Journal of Learning and Cognition., 10.
45. Pieschel, S., Stahl, E., & Bromme, R. (2008). Epistemological beliefs and self-regulated learning with hypertext. Metacognition and Learning, 3, 17-37.
46. Pintrich, P. R., and Marx., R. W., & Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63, 167-199.
47. Pintrich, P. R. (1999). Motivational beliefs as resources for and constraints on conceptual change. In W. Schnotz, S. Vosniadou, & M. Carretero (Eds.), New Perspectives on Conceptual Change (Advances in Learning and Instruction Series) (pp. 33-50). Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.
48. Pfundt, H., & Duit, R. (1991). Bibliography: Student's Alternative Frameworks and Science Education. Kiel: Institut für die Pädagogik der Naturwissenschaften.
49. Radant, M. & Dalbert, C. (2006, September). Dimensionen der Komplexitätstoleranz: Ergebnisse einer Synopse von Persö nlichkeitskonstrukten. Vortrag für den 45. Kongress der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Psychologie in Nürnberg, 2005.
50. Richter, T. & Schroeder, S. (2008). Falschinformation. In N. Krämer, S. Schwan, D. Unz & M. Suckfüll (Hrsg.), Schlüsselbegriffe der Medienpsychologie (S. 134-138). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
51. Reigeluth, C. M. (1983). Instructional design theories and models. An overview of their current status. Mahwah, NJ. Erlbaum.
52. Reis, J. (1997). Ambiguitätstoleranz. Beiträge zur Entwicklung eines Persönlichkeitskonstrukts. Heidelberg: Asanger.
53. Richter, T. (2007). Epistemologische Einschätzungen beim Textverstehen (unveränderter Nachdruck der ersten Auflage 2003/zweite Auflage). Lengerich: Pabst Science Publishers.
54. Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and Categorization (pp. 27-48). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
55. Schiefele, U. (1990). Thematisches Interesse, Variablen des Leseprozesses und Textverstehen. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle und Angewandte Psychologie, 37(2), 304-332.
56. Schiefele, U. (1996). Motivation und Lernen mit Texten. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
57. Schiefele, U. (2009). Situational and individual interest. In K. R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of Motivation at School (pp. 197-222). New York: Taylor and Francis.
58. Schnotz, W. (1982). How do different readers learn with different text organizations? In A. Flammer & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Discourse Processing (pp. 87-97). New York: Elsevier Science Publishing Company.
59. Schnotz, W. (1984). Comparative instructional text organization. In H. Mandl, N. L. Stein, & T. Trabasso (Eds.), Learning and Comprehension of Text (pp. 53-81). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
60. Schnotz, W. & Preuß, A. (1997). Task-dependent construction of mental models as a basis for conceptual change. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 12(2), 185-210.
61. Silvia, P. J. (2005). What is interesting? Exploring the appraisal structure of interest. Emotion, 5, 89-102. (Pubitemid 40389110)
62. Schommer-Aitkins, M. (2002). An evolving theoretical framework for an epistemological belief system. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal Epistemology (pp. 103-118). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
63. Singer, M., & Gagnon, N. (1999). Detecting causal inconsistencies in scientific text. In R. S. Goldmann, A. C. Graesser, & P. van den Broek (Eds.), Narrative Comprehension, Causality, and Coherence. Essays in Honor of Tom Trabasso (pp. 179-194). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
64. Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In R. Duschl & R. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of Science, Cognitive Psychology and Educational Theory and Practice (pp. 147-176). New York: New York University Press.
65. Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The Uses of Argument (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
66. van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
67. Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1994). Mental models of the day/night cycle. Cognitive Science, 18, 123-183.
68. Wirtz, M., & Caspar, F. (2002). Beurteilerübereinstimmung und Beurteilerreliabilität. Methoden zur Bestimmung und Verbesserung der Zuverlässigkeit von Einschätzungen mittels Kategoriensystemen und Ratingskalen. Göttingen: Hogrefe.