Constraints on learning from expository science texts

Developmental Cognitive Science Goes to School

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 45-58

  Wiley, Jennifer ^a   Sanchez, Christopher A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

^b ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84920771554     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (50)

1. Ainsworth, S., & Th Loizou, A. (2003). The effects of self-explaining when learning with text or diagrams. Cognitive Science, 27, 669-681.
2. Anderson, M. C., & Thiede, K. W. (2008). Why do delayed summaries improve metacompre-hension accuracy? Acta Psychologica, 128, 110-118.
3. Black, A. A. (2005). Spatial ability and earth science conceptual understanding. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(4), 402-414.
4. Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor analytic studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. ChanLin, L. J. (2000). Attributes of animation for learning scientific knowledge. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 27(4), 228-238.
6. 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 (Vol. 5). Mahwah, NJ: LEA. pp. 161-238.
7. Contreras, M. J., Colom, R., Hernandez, J. M., & Santacreu, J. (2003). Is static spatial performance distinguishable from dynamic spatial performance? A latent-variable analysis. Journal of General Psychology, 130, 277-288.
8. D'Oliveira, T. C. (2004). Dynamic spatial ability: An exploratory analysis and a confirmatory study. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 14, 19-38.
9. Fincher-Kiefer, R., & D'Agostino, P. (2004). The role of visuospatial resources in generating predictive and bridging inferences. Discourse Processes, 37, 205-224.
10. French, J. W., Ekstrom, R. B., & Price, L. A. (1963). Kit of reference tests for cognitive factors. Princeton: Educational Testing Service.
11. Geiger, J. F., & Litwiller, R. M. (2005). Spatial working memory and gender differences in science. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 32, 49-58.
12. Gentner, D., & Stevens, A. L. (1983). Mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
13. Gobert, J. D. (2000). A typology of causal models for plate tectonics. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 937-977.
14. Graesser, A. C., & Bertus, E. L. (1998). The construction of causal inferences while reading expository texts on science and technology. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2, 247-269.
15. Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Thiede, K. W. (2008). Individual differences, rereading, and self-explanation. Memory & Cognition, 36, 93-103.
16. Harp, S. F., & Mayer, R. E. (1997). The role of interest in learning from scientific text and illustrations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 92-102.
17. Hegarty, M., & Steinhoff, K. (1997). Individual differences in use of diagrams as memory in mechanical reasoning. Learning and Individual Differences, 9, 19-44.
18. Hunt, E., Pellegrino, J. W., Frick, R. W., Farr, S. A., & Alderton, D. L. (1988). The ability to reason about movement in the visual field. Intelligence, 12, 77-100.
19. Jackson, D. N., III, Vernon, P. A., & Jackson, D. N. (1993). Dynamic spatial performance and general intelligence. Intelligence, 17(4), 451-460.
20. Kane, M. J., Bleckley, K. M., Conway, A. R. A., & Engle, R. W. (2001). A controlled-attention view of working memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130,169-183.
21. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigmfor cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
22. Koroghlanian, C., & Klein, J. D. (2004). The effect of audio and animation in multimedia instruction. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13, 23-45.
23. Kozma, R., & Russell, J. (2005). Multimedia learning of chemistry. In R. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 409-428.
24. Linderholm, T., & van den Broek, P. (2002). The effects of reading purpose and working memory capacity on the processing of expository text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 778-84.
25. Lowe, R. K. (2004). Interrogation of a dynamic visualization during learning. Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 257-274.
26. Mandl, H., & Levin, J. R. (Eds.) (1989). Knowledge acquisition from text and pictures. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
27. Mayer, R. E., Hegarty, M., Mayer, S. Y., & Campbell, J. (2005). When passive media promote active learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11, 256-265.
28. McNamara, D. S. (2004). SERT: Self-explanation reading training. Discourse Processes, 38, 1-30.
29. National Research Council. (2006). Learning to think spatially. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
30. Nesbit, J. C., & Adesope, O. O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76, 413-448.
31. Pellegrino, J. W., & Hunt, E. B. (1991). Cognitive models for understanding and assessing spatial abilities. In H. A. H. Rowe (Ed.), Intelligence: Reconceptualization and measurement. Mahwah, NJ: LEA. pp. 203-225.
32. Sanchez, C. A., & Wiley, J. (2006). An examination of the seductive details effect in terms of working memory capacity. Memory & Cognition, 34, 344-355.
33. Sanchez, C. A., & Wiley, J. (2007). Spatial abilities and learning complex science topics. Proceedings of the 29th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Nashville, TN.
34. Schnotz, W. (2005). An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. In R. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 49-70.
35. Singer, M., & O'Connell, G. (2003). Robust inference processes in expository text comprehension. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 15, 607-631.
36. Stensvold, M. S., & Wilson, J. T. (1990). The interaction of verbal ability with concept mapping in learning from a chemistry laboratory activity. Science Education, 74, 473-480.
37. Stumpf, H., & Eliot, J. (1995). Gender-related differences in spatial ability and the k factor of general spatial ability in a population of academically talented students. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 33-45.
38. Sweet, A. P., & Snow, C. E. (Eds.) (2003). Rethinking reading comprehension. New York: Guilford Press.
39. Thiede, K. W., & Anderson, M. C. M. (2003). Summarizing can improve metacomprehension accuracy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 129-160.
40. Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 66-73.
41. Thiede, K. W., Dunlosky, J., Griffin, T. D., & Wiley, J. (2005). Understanding the delayed keyword effect on metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Experiment Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 31, 1267-1280.
42. Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Anderson, M. (2010). Poor metacomprehension accuracy as a result of inappropriate cue use. Discourse Processes, 47, 331-362.
43. Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Redford, J. S. (2009). Metacognitive monitoring during and after reading. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education. New York: Routledge.
44. Trabasso, T., & van den Broek, P. (1985). Causal thinking and the representation of narrative events. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 612-630.
45. Tversky, B., Morrison, J. B., & Betrancourt, M. (2002). Animation: Can it facilitate? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57(4), 247-262.
46. Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook on research in teaching (3rd edn). New York: Macmillan. pp. 315-327.
47. Wiley, J., Griffin, T., & Thiede, K. W. (2005). Putting the comprehension in metacomprehension. Journal of General Psychology, 132, 408-428.
48. Wiley, J., & Myers, J. L. (2003). Availability and accessibility of information and causal inferences from scientific text. Discourse Processes, 36, 109-129.
49. Wiley, J., & Voss, J. F. (1999). Constructing arguments from multiple sources. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 301-311.
50. Wu, H., & Shah, P. (2004). Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science Education, 88(3), 465-492.