Effect of delay on search decisions in a task-oriented reading environment

Metacognition and Learning

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 113-130

  Mañá, Amelia ^a   Vidal Abarca, Eduardo ^a   Salmerón, Ladislao ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VALENCIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Individual differences; Metacomprehension accuracy; Self regulated reading; Task oriented reading

Indexed keywords

EID: 84983795596     PISSN: 15561623     EISSN: 15561631     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11409-016-9162-x     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Aiken, S., & West, G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2. Anderson, M. C. M., & Thiede, K. W. (2008). Why do delayed summaries improve metacomprehension accuracy? Acta Psychologica, 128, 110–118. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2007.10.006.
3. Cataldo, M. G., & Oakhill, J. (2000). Why are poor comprehenders inefficient searchers? An investigation into the effects of text representation and spatial memory on the ability to locate information in text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 791–799. doi:10.1037/0022–0663.92.4.791.
4. Cerdán, R., Gilabert, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2011). Selecting information to answer questions: Strategic individual differences when searching texts. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(2), 201–205. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2010.11.007.
5. Coté, N., Goldman, S. R., & Saul, E. U. (1998). Students making sense of informational text: Relations between processing and representation. Discourse Processes, 25, 1–53. doi:10.1080/01638539809545019.
6. Dunlosky, J., & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognition. London: SAGE Publications.
7. Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K., & 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. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2005.01.011.
8. Fernández, J. (1959). Medidas sencillas de lecturabilidad. Consigna, 214, 29–32.
9. Ferrer, A., Vidal-Abarca, E., Avila, V., Mañá, A., & Llorens, A. C. (2010). Do text availability and question format have an impact on on-line reading behavior and comprehension processes? Paper presented at the 20th Annual Meeting of the Society for Text & Discourse. Chicago: August.
10. Gil, L., Martínez, T., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2015). On-line assessment of strategic reading literacy skills. Computers & Education, 82, 50–59. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.026.
11. Hannon, B., & Daneman, M. (2004). Shallow semantic processing of text: An individual-differences account. Discourse Processes, 37(3), 187–204. doi:10.1207/s15326950dp3703_1.
12. Hayes, Andrew F. (2012), “PROCESS: A Versatile Computational Tool for Observed Variable Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Modeling,” white paper, The Ohio State University.
13. Hayes, A. F., & Matthes, J. (2009). Computational procedures for probing interactions in OLS and logistic regression: SPSS and SAS implementations. Behavior Research Methods, 41(3), 924–936. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.3.924.
14. Higgs, K., Magliano, J. P., Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, T., & McNamara, D. S. (2015). Bridging Skill and Task Oriented Reading. Manuscript submitted for publication
15. Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one's own knowledge during study: a cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126(4), 349–370. doi:10.1037/0096–3445.126.4.349.
16. Linn, L. M., Moore, D., & Zabrucky, K. M. (2001). An assessment of students’ calibration of comprehension and calibration of performance using multiple measures. Reading Psychology, 22, 111–128. doi:10.1080/02702710119125.
17. Magliano, J. P., Trabasso, T., & Graesser, A. C. (1999). Strategic processing during comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 615. doi:10.1037/0022–0663.91.4.615.
18. Maki, R. H. (1998). Test predictions over text material. In D. J. Hacker, A. C. Graesser, & J. Dunlosky (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 117–144). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
19. Maki, R. H., Jonas, D., & Kallod, M. (1994). The relationship between comprehension and metacomprehension ability. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1, 126–138.
20. Maki, R. H., Shields, M., Wheeler, A. E., & Zachilli, T. L. (2005). Individual differences in absolute and relative metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(4), 723–731. doi:10.1037/0022–0663.97.4.723.
21. Martínez, T., Vidal-Abarca, E., Sellés, P., & Gilabert, R. (2008). Evaluación de las estrategias y procesos de comprensión: el Test de Procesos de Comprensión. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 31(3), 319–332.
22. McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. (2009). Toward a comprehensive model of comprehension. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 51, 297–384. doi:10.1016/S0079–7421(09)51009–2.
23. Ness, M. (2011). Explicit reading comprehension instruction in elementary classrooms: teacher use of reading comprehension strategies. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 25(1), 98–117. doi:10.1080/02568543.2010.531076.
24. OECD (2002). Programme for International Student Assessment: Sample tasks from the PISA 2000 assessment of reading, mathematical and scientific literacy. Paris: OECD.
25. OECD (2010). PISA 2009 Results: What students know and can do. Student performance in reading, mathematics and science. (Volume I). Paris: OECD.
26. Ozuru, Y., Best, R., Bell, C., Witherspoon, A., & McNamara, D. S. (2007). Influence of question format and text availability on the assessment of expository text comprehension. Cognition and Instruction, 25, 399–438. doi:10.1080/07370000701632371.
27. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879.
28. Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, method, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 185–227.
29. Ramos, J. L. y Cuetos, F. (1999): Evaluación de los procesos lectores en alumnus del tercer ciclo de Educación Primaria y ESO (PROLEC-SE), MADRID, TEA Ediciones.
30. Ramos, L., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2013). Diferencias entre estudiantes con alta y baja competencia lectora: un estudio con metodología de pensar en voz alta (Differences between students with high and low reading literacy skills: A study with think aloud methodology). Cultura y Educación, 25(3), 295–308. doi:10.1174/113564013807749722.
31. Rhodes, M. G., & Tauber, S. K. (2011). The influence of delaying judgments of learning on metacognitive accuracy: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 131–148. doi:10.1037/a0021705.
32. Rouet, J. F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to Web-based learning. Psychology Press.
33. Salmerón, L., Vidal-Abarca, E., Mañá, A., Martínez, T., Gil, L., & Naumann, J. (2015). Strategic decisions in task-oriented reading. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 18, 1–10. doi:10.1017/sjp.2015.101.
34. Schaffner, E., & Schiefele, U. (2013). The prediction of reading comprehension by cognitive and motivational factors: Does text accessibility during comprehension testing make a difference? Learning and Individual Differences, 26, 42–54. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2013.04.003.
35. Snow, C. & RAND Reading Study Group (2002). Reading for understanding. RAND URL: http://www.rand.org/
36. Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognition monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 66–73. doi:10.1037/0022–0663.95.1.66.
37. Thiede, K. W., Dunlosky, J., Griffin, T. D., & Wiley, J. (2005). Understanding the delayed keyword effect on metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1267–1280. doi:10.1037/0278–7393.31.6.1267.
38. Vidal-Abarca, E., Gilabert, R., Martínez, T., Sellés, P., Abad, N., & Ferrer, C. (2007). TEC, Test de Estrategias de Comprensión (Test of Comprehension Strategies). Madrid: ICCE.
39. Vidal-Abarca, E., Mañá, A., & Gil, L. (2010). Individual differences for self-regulating task-oriented reading activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 817–826. doi:10.1037/a0020062.
40. Vidal-Abarca, E., Martinez, T., Salmerón, L., Cerdán, R., Gilabert, R., Gil, L., Mañá, A., Llorens, A. C., & Ferris, R. (2011). Recording online processes in task-oriented reading with Read&Answer. Behavior Research Methods, 43(1), 179–192. doi:10.3758/s13428–010–0032-1.
41. Vidal-Abarca, E., Britt, M. A., & Rouet, J-F. (2015). Reading as decision making. Manuscript submitted for publication.