Reading an analogy can cause the illusion of comprehension

Discourse Processes

Volumn 52, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 376-405

  Jaeger, Allison J ^a   Wiley, Jennifer ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84930257578     PISSN: 0163853X     EISSN: 15326950     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2015.1026679     Document Type: Article

References (102)

1. Alexander, P. A., and Kulikowich, J. M. (1991). Domain knowledge and analogic reasoning ability as predictors of expository text comprehension. Journal of Literacy Research, 23, 165-190.
2. Black, A. A. (2005). Spatial ability and earth science conceptual understanding. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53, 402-414.
3. Bodner, G. M., and McMillen, T. L. B. (1986). Cognitive restructuring as an early stage in problem solving. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 727-737.
4. Bowen, G. M., and Roth, W. M. (2005). Data and graph interpretation practices among preservice science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 1063-1088.
5. Braasch, J. L., and Goldman, S. R. (2010). The role of prior knowledge in learning from analogies in science texts. Discourse Processes, 47, 447-479.
6. Bråten, I., and Strømsø, H. I. (2010). When law students read multiple documents about global warming: Examining the role of topic-specific beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing. Instructional Science, 38, 635-657.
7. Brown, D. E. (1992). Using examples and analogies to remediate misconceptions in physics: Factors influencing conceptual change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 17-34.
8. Butcher, K. R. (2006). Learning from text with diagrams: Promoting mental model development and inference generation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 182-197.
9. Canham, M., and Hegarty, M. (2010). Effects of knowledge and display design on comprehension of complex graphics. Learning and Instruction, 20, 155-166.
10. Carpenter, P. A., and Shah, P. (1998). A model of the perceptual and conceptual processes in graph comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 4, 75-100.
11. Carroll, J. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor analytical studies. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
12. Carter, C. S., LaRussa, M. A., and Bodner, G. M. (1987). A study of two measures of spatial ability as predictors of success in different levels of general chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 645-657.
13. Casey, B., Winner, E., Brabeck, M., and Sullivan, K. (1990). Visual-spatial abilities in art, math and science majors: Effects of sex, family, handedness, and spatial experience. In K. J. Gilhooly, M. T. G. Keane, R. H. Logie, and G. Erdos (Eds.), Lines of thinking (Vol. 2, 275-294). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
14. Cerdán, R., and Vidal-Abarca, E. (2008). The effects of tasks on integrating information from multiple documents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 209-222.
15. Curtis, R. V., and Reigeluth, C. M. (1984). The use of analogies in written text. Instructional Science, 13, 99-117.
16. de Bruin, A. B., Thiede, K. W., Camp, G., and Redford, J. (2011). Generating keywords improves metacomprehension and self-regulation in elementary and middle school children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 109, 294-310.
17. Donnelly, C. M., and McDaniel, M. A. (1993). Use of analogy in learning scientific concepts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 975-987.
18. Duit, R. (1991). On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. Science Education, 75, 649-672.
19. Dunlosky, J., and Lipko, A. (2007). Metacomprehension: A brief history of how to improve its accuracy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 228-232.
20. Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., and Middleton, E. (2005). What constrains the accuracy of metacomprehension judgments? Testing the transfer-appropriate-monitoring and accessibility hypotheses. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 551-565.
21. Ekstrom, R., French, J., Harman, H., and Derman, D. (1976). Kit of factor-references cognitive tests. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
22. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive- developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
23. Garner, R., Brown, R., Sanders, S., and Menke, D. J. (1992). “Seductive details” and learning from text. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, and A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development (239-254). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Gentner, D., and Holyoak, K. J. (1997). Reasoning and learning by analogy: Introduction. American Psychologist, 52, 32-34.
25. Glynn, S. M., Britton, B. K., Semrud-Clikeman, M., and Muth, K. D. (1989). Analogical reasoning and problem solving in science textbooks. In Handbook of creativity (383-398). New York, NY: Springer.
26. Glynn, S. M., and Takahashi, T. (1998). Learning from analogy-enhanced science text. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 1129-1149.
27. Graesser, A. C., Wiley, J., Goldman, S. R., OReilly, T., Jeon, M., and McDaniel, B. (2007). SEEK web tutor: Fostering a critical stance while exploring the causes of volcanic eruption. Metacognition and Learning, 2, 89-105.
28. Griffin, T. D., Jee, B. D., and Wiley, J. (2009). The effects of domain knowledge on metacomprehension accuracy. Memory and Cognition, 37, 1001-1013.
29. Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., Britt, M. A., and Salas, C. (2012). The role of CLEAR thinking in learning science from multiple-document inquiry tasks. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 5, 63-78.
30. Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., and Salas, C. (2013). Supporting effective self-regulated learning: The critical role of monitoring. In R. Azevedo and V. Aleven (Eds.), International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies (19-34). New York, NY: Springer Science.
31. Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., and Thiede, K. W. (2008). Individual differences, rereading, and selfexplanation: Concurrent processing and cue validity as constraints on metacomprehension accuracy. Memory and Cognition, 36, 93-103.
32. Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., Horgan, D. D., and Rakow, E. A. (2000). Test prediction and performance in a classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 160-170.
33. Harp, S. F., and Mayer, R. E. (1998). How seductive details do their damage: A theory of cognitive interest in science learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 414-434.
34. Hegarty, M. (2010). Components of spatial intelligence. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 52, 265-297). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
35. Hegarty, M., and Just, M. A. (1993). Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 717-742.
36. Hegarty, M., and Kozhevnikov, M. (1999). Types of visual-spatial representations and mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 684-689.
37. Hegarty, M., and Sims, V. K. (1994). Individual differences in mental animation during mechanical reasoning. Memory and Cognition, 22, 411-430.
38. Henderson, G. (1999). Learning with diagrams. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 45, 17-25.
39. Hidi, S. (1990). Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of Educational Research, 60, 549-571.
40. Hidi, S., and Anderson, V. (1992). Situational interest and its impact on reading expository writing. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, and A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development (239-254). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
41. Humphreys, L. G., and Yao, G. (2002). Prediction of graduate major from cognitive and self-report test scores obtained during the high school years. Psychological Reports, 90, 3-30.
42. Jaeger, A. J., and Wiley, J. (2014). Do illustrations help or harm metacomprehension accuracy? Learning and Instruction, 34, 58-73.
43. Jee, B. D., Uttal, D. H., Gentner, D., Manduca, C., Shipley, T., Sageman, B., Tikoff, B. (2010). Analogical thinking in geoscience education. Journal of Geoscience Education, 58, 2-13.
44. Kane, M. J., Hambrick, D. Z., Tuholski, S. W., Wilhelm, O., Payne, T. W., and Engle, R. W. (2004). The generality of working memory capacity: A latent variable approach to verbal and visuo-spatial memory span and reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 189-217.
45. Kintsch, W., Welsch, D., Schmalhofer, F., and Zimny, S. (1990). Sentence memory: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 133-159.
46. Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one’s own knowledge during study: A cue utilization approach to judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 349-370.
47. Koriat, A. (2011). Subjective confidence in perceptual judgments: A test of the self-consistency model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 117-139.
48. Koroghlanian, C., and Klein, J. D. (2004). The effect of audio and animation in multimedia instruction. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13, 23-45.
49. Kozhevnikov, M., and Hegarty, M. (2001). A dissociation between object manipulation spatial ability and spatial orientation ability. Memory and Cognition, 29, 745-756.
50. Lipko, A. R., Dunlosky, J., Hartwig, M. K., Rawson, K. A., Swan, K., and Cook, D. (2009). Using standards to improve middle school students’ accuracy at evaluating the quality of their recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15, 307-318.
51. Lohman, D. F. (1979). Spatial ability: Review and re-analysis of the correlational literature. Stanford University Technical Report No. 8, School of Education, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
52. Maki, R. H. (1998). Test predictions over text material. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, and A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (117-145). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
53. Maki, R. H., and Berry, S. L. (1984). Metacomprehension of text material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 10, 663-679.
54. Maki, R. H., Shields, M., Wheeler, A. E., and Zacchilli, T. L. (2005). Individual differences in absolute and relative metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 723-731.
55. Marshalek, B., Lohman, D. F., and Snow, R. E. (1983). The complexity continuum in the radex and hierarchical models of intelligence. Intelligence, 7, 107-127.
56. Mason, L., Ariasi, N., and Boldrin, A. (2011). Epistemic beliefs in action: Spontaneous reflections about knowledge and knowing during online information searching and their influence on learning. Learning and Instruction, 21, 137-151.
57. Mayer, R. E. (1993). Illustrations that instruct. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 4, 253-284). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
58. Mayer, R. E. (Ed.). (2005). Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
59. McDaniel, M. A., and Donnelly, C. M. (1996). Learning with analogy and elaborative interrogation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 508-519.
60. McGee, M. G. (1979). Human spatial abilities: Psychometric studies and environmental, genetic, hormonal, and neurological influences. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 889-918.
61. McTigue, E. M., and Slough, S. W. (2010). Student-accessible science texts: Elements of design. Reading Psychology, 31, 213-227.
62. Mills, C. M., and Keil, F. C. (2004). Knowing the limits of one’s understanding: The development of an awareness of an illusion of explanatory depth. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 87, 1-32.
63. Miyake, A., Rettinger, D. A., Friedman, N. P., Shah, P., and Hegarty, M. (2001). Visuospatial working memory, executive functioning and spatial abilities. How are they related? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 621-640.
64. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. committee on a conceptual framework for new K-12 science education standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
65. Nelson, T. O. (1984). A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 109-133.
66. Nelson, T. O., and Dunlosky, J. (1991). When people’s judgments of learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall: The “delayed-JOL effect”. Psychological Science, 2, 267-270.
67. Orgill, M., and Bodner, G. M. (2006). An analysis of the effectiveness of analogy use in college-level biochemistry textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 1040-1060.
68. Pallrand, G. J., and Seeber, F. (1984). Spatial ability and achievement in introductory physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21, 507-516.
69. Paris, N. A., and Glynn, S. M. (2004). Elaborate analogies in science text: Tools for enhancing preservice teachers’ knowledge and attitudes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 230-247.
70. Pribyl, J. R., and Bodner, G. M. (1987). Spatial ability and its role in organic chemistry: A study of four organic courses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 229-240.
71. Rawson, K. A., and Dunlosky, J. (2012). When is practice testing most effective for improving the durability and efficiency of student learning? Educational Psychology Review, 24, 419-435.
72. Rawson, K. A., Dunlosky, J., and Thiede, K. W. (2000). The rereading effect: Metacomprehension accuracy improves across reading trials. Memory and Cognition, 28, 1004-1010.
73. Redford, J. S., Thiede, K. W., Wiley, J., and Griffin, T. D. (2012). Concept mapping improves metacomprehension accuracy among 7th graders. Learning and Instruction, 22, 262-270.
74. Rouet, J. F., and Britt, M. A. (2011). Relevance processes in multiple document comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, and G. Schraw (Eds.), Text Relevance and Learning From Text (19-52). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
75. Royer, J. M., Carlo, M. S., Dufresne, R., and Mestre, J. (1996). The assessment of levels of domain expertise while reading. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 373-408.
76. Sadoski, M., Goetz, E. T., and Fritz, J. B. (1993). Impact of concreteness on comprehensibility, interest, and memory for text: Implications for dual coding theory and text design. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 291-304.
77. Salthouse, T. A., Mitchell, D. R., Skovronek, E., and Babcock, R. L. (1989). Effects of adult age and working memory on reasoning and spatial abilities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 507-516.
78. Sanchez, C., and Wiley, J. (2006). An examination of the seductive details effect in terms of working memory capacity. Memory and Cognition, 34, 344-355.
79. Serra, M. J., and Dunlosky, J. (2010). Metacomprehension judgments reflect the belief that diagrams improve learning from text. Memory, 18, 698-711.
80. Sibley, D. F. (2005). Visual abilities and misconceptions about plate tectonics. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53, 471-477.
81. Sibley, D. F. (2009). A cognitive framework for reasoning with scientific models. Journal of Geoscience Education, 57, 255-263.
82. Thiede, K. W., and Anderson, M. (2003). Summarizing can improve metacomprehension accuracy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 129-160.
83. Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M., and Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 66-73.
84. Thiede, K. W., Dunlosky, J., Griffin, T. D., and Wiley, J. (2005). Understanding the delayed keyword effect on metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1267-1280.
85. Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., and Anderson, M. C. M. (2010). Poor metacomprehension accuracy as a result of inappropriate cue use. Discourse Processes, 47, 331-362.
86. Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., and Redford, J. (2009). Metacognitive monitoring during and after reading. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, and A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition and self-regulated learning (85-106). New York, NY: Routledge.
87. Thiede, K. W., Redford, J. S., Wiley, J., and Griffin, T. D. (2012). Elementary school experience with comprehension testing may influence metacomprehension accuracy among seventh and eighth graders. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 554-564.
88. Thiede, K. W., Wiley, J., and Griffin, T. D. (2011). Test expectancy affects metacomprehension accuracy. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 264-273.
89. Tversky, B. (1995). Cognitive origins of conventions. In F. T. Marchese (Ed.), Understanding images (29-53). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
90. Tversky, B. (2001). Spatial schemas in depictions. In M. Gattis (Ed.), Spatial schemas and abstract thought (79-111). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
91. Tversky, B., Zacks, J., Lee, P., and Heiser, J. (2000). Lines, blobs, crosses and arrows: Diagrammatic communication with schematic figures. In M. Anderson, P. Cheng, and V. Haarslev (Eds.), Theory and application of diagrams (221-230). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
92. Uttal, D. H., and Cohen, C. A. (2012). Spatial thinking and STEM education: When, why and how. Psychology of learning and motivation, 57, 147-181.
93. van Loon, M. H., de Bruin, A. B., van Gog, T., and van Merriënboer, J. J. (2013). Activation of inaccurate prior knowledge affects primary-school students’ metacognitive judgments and calibration. Learning and Instruction, 24, 15-25.
94. Venville, G. J., and Treagust, D. F. (1996). The role of analogies in promoting conceptual change in biology. Instructional Science, 24, 295-320.
95. Wiley, J., Goldman, S., Graesser, A., Sanchez, C., Ash, I., andHemmerich, J. (2009). Source evaluation, comprehension, and learning in internet science inquiry tasks. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 1060-1106.
96. Wiley, J., Griffin, T. D., and Thiede, K. W. (2005). Putting the comprehension in metacomprehension. Journal of General Psychology, 132, 408-428.
97. Wiley, J., Sanchez, C. A., and Jaeger, A. J. (2014). The individual differences in working memory capacity principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (598-619). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
98. Wiley, J., and Voss, J. F. (1999). Constructing arguments from multiple sources: Tasks that promote understanding and not just memory for text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 301-311.
99. Winne, P., and Hadwin, A. (2008). The weave of motivation and self-regulated learning. In D. Schunk and B. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (297-314). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
100. Wu, H., and Shah, P. (2004). Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science Education, 88, 465-492.
101. Yanowitz, K. L. (2001). Using analogies to improve elementary school students’ inferential reasoning about scientific concepts. School Science and Mathematics, 101, 133-142.
102. Zook, K. B., and Maier, J. M. (1994). Systematic analysis of variables that contribute to the formation of analogical misconceptions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 589-600.