Noticing and Fixing Difficulties While Understanding Science Texts

The Psychology of Science Text Comprehension

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 281-307

  Otero, José ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALCALÁ   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85136654758     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781410612434-21     Document Type: Chapter

References (84)

1. Abelson, R. E (1959). Modes of resolution of belief dilemmas. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 3, 343-352.
2. Abelson, R. E (1968a). Psychological implication. In R. E Abelson, E. Aronson, E. J. McGuire, T M. Newcomb, M. J. Rosenberg, and E H. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Theories of cognitive consistency: A sourcebook (pp. 112-139). Chicago: Rand McNally.
3. Abelson, R. E (1968b). A summary of hypotheses on modes of resolution. In R. E Abelson, E. Aronson, E. J. McGuire, T. M. Newcomb, M. J. Rosenberg, and EH. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Theories of cognitive consistency: A sourcebook (pp. 716-720). Chicago: Rand McNally.
4. Acredolo, C, and O’Connor, J. (1991). On the difficulty of detecting cognitive uncertainty. Human Development, 34, 204-223.
5. Adams, J. S. (1968). A framework for the study of modes of resolving inconsistency. In R. E Abelson, E. Aronson, E. J. McGuire, T. M. Newcomb, M. J. Rosenberg, and E H. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Theories of cognitive consistency: A sourcebook (pp. 655-660). Chicago: Rand McNally.
6. Aronson, E. (1968). Dissonance theory: progress and problems. In R. E Abelson, E. Aronson, E. J. McGuire, T. M. Newcomb, M. J. Rosenberg, and E H. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Theories of cognitive consistency: A sourcebook (pp. 5-27). Chicago: Rand McNally.
7. Baker, L. (1979). Comprehension monitoring: Identifying and coping with text confusions. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11, 363-374.
8. Baker, L. (1984). Spontaneous versus instructed use of multiple standards for evaluating comprehension: Effects of age, reading proficiency, and type of standard. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 38, 289-311.
9. Baker, L. (1985a). Differences in the standards used by college students to evaluate their comprehension of expository prose. ReadingResearchQuarterly, 22, 297-313.
10. Baker, L. (1985b). How do we know when we don’t understand? Standards for evaluating text comprehension. In D. L. Forrest-Eressley, G. E. Mackinnon, and T. G. Waller (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition and human performance (pp. 155-205). New York: Academic Press.
11. Baker, L., and Anderson, R. I. (1982). Effects of inconsistent information on text processing: Evidence for comprehension monitoring. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 281-294.
12. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., Hamilton, R. L., and Kucan, L. (1997). Questioning the author: An approach for enhancing student engagement with text. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
13. Britton, B., and Eisenhart, E J. (1993). Expertise, text coherence and constraint satisfaction: Effects on harmony and settling rate. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 266-271). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. Brunkhorst, B. J. (1992). A study of student outcomes and teacher characteristics in exemplary middle and junior high science programs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 571-583.
15. Burbules, N. C, and Linn, M. C. (1988). Response to contradiction: Scientific reasoning during adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 69-75.
16. Cacioppo, J. T, and Petty, R. E. (1982) The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116-131.
17. Campanario, J. M., and Otero, J. (1997). Análisis del proceso de regulación de textos con inconsistencias [Analysis of the regulation process of texts containing inconsistencies]. Unpublished manuscript. Universidad de Alcalá, Madrid, Spain.
18. Chan, C, Burtis, J., and Bereiter, C. (1997). Knowledge building as a mediator of conflict in conceptual change. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 1-40.
19. Chinn, C, and Brewer, W. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63, 1-49.
20. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., and Larkin, K. M. (1980). Inference in text understanding. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, and W. E Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 385-407). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. Coté, R, Goldman, S., and Saul, E. U. (1998). Students making sense of informational text: Relations between processing and representation. Discourse Processes, 25, 1-53.
22. Cuerva, J., and Otero, J. (1996, September). Influence ofepistemic authority and knowledge activation on the detection of inconsistencies in science texts. Paper presented at the International Seminar “Using Complex Information Systems, " UCIS’96, Poitiers, France.
23. Darden, L. (1992). Strategies for anomaly resolution. In R. N. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive models of science (pp. 251-273). Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press.
24. De Manuel, J. (1995). Por qué hay veranos e inviernos? Representaciones de estudiantes (12-18) y de futuros maestros sobre algunos aspectos del modelo sol-tierra [Why are there summer and winter? Students’ (12-18) and prospective teachers’ representations of some aspects of the model sun-earth]. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 13, 227-236.
25. diSessa, A. (1982). Unlearning Aristotelian physics: A case study of knowledge-based learning. Cognitive Science, 6, 37-75.
26. Ericsson, K., and Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working memory. Psychological Review, 102, 211-245.
27. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
28. García-Arista, E., Campanario, J. M., and Otero, J. (1997) Influence of subject matter setting on comprehension monitoring. European Journal of Psychology of Education, XXI, 427-441.
29. Glass, D. C. (1968). Individual differences and the resolution of cognitive inconsistencies. In R. E Abelson, E. Aronson, E. J. McGuire, T M. Newcomb, M. J. Rosenberg, and E H. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Theories of cognitive consistency: A sourcebook (pp. 615-623). Chicago: Rand McNally.
30. Gorman, M. E. (1986). How the possibility of error affects falsification on a task that models scientific problem solving. British Journal of Psychology, 77, 85-96.
31. Graesser, A. C., Millis, K. K., and Zwaan, R. A. (1997). Discourse comprehension. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 163-189.
32. Graesser, A. C., Person, N. K., and Huber, J. D. (1992). Mechanisms that generate questions. In T. Lauer, E. Peacock, and A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Questions and information systems (pp. 167-187). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33. Graeser, A. C., Singer, M., and Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 3, 371-395.
34. Grice, H. E (1975). Logic and conversation. In E Cole and J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
35. Hardyck, J. A., and Kardush, M. (1968). A modest modish model for dissonance reduction. In R. E Abelson, E. Aronson, E. J. McGuire, T. M. Newcomb, M. J. Rosenberg, and E H. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Theories of cognitive consistency: A sourcebook (pp. 684-692). Chicago: Rand McNally.
36. Hopfield, J. J. (1982). Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 79, 2554-2558. Reprinted in J. A. Anderson and E. Rosenfeld (Eds.), Neurocomputing. Foundations of research (pp. 460-464). Cambridge, MA: MIT Eress.
37. Johnson, H. M., and Seifert, C. M. (1994). Sources of continued influence effect: When misinformation in memory affects later inferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 1420-1436.
38. Johnson, H. M., and Seifert, C. M. (1999). Modifying mental representations: Comprehending corrections. In H. van Oostendorp and S. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 303-318). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
39. Just, M. A., and Carpenter, E A. (1987). The psychology ofreadingand language comprehension. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
40. Karabenick, S. A. (1996). Social influences on metacognition: Effects of coleamer questioning on comprehension monitoring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 689-703.
41. Kardash, C. M., and Scholes, R. J. (1996). Effects of preexisting beliefs, epistemological beliefs and need for cognition on interpretation of controversial issues. Journal of Educational Psychohgy, 88, 260-271.
42. Kelman, H. C, and Baron, R. M. (1968). Determinants of modes of resolving inconsistency dilemmas: A functional analysis. In R. E Abelson, E. Aronson, E. J. McGuire, T. M. Newcomb, M. J. Rosenberg, and EH.Tannenbaum (Eds.), Theories of cognitive consistency: A sourcebook (pp. 670-683). Chicago: Rand McNally.
43. Kintsch, W. (1988). The construction-integration model of text comprehension. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.
44. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
45. Kuhn, D. (1989). Children and adults as intuitive scientists. Psychological Review, 96, 674-689.
46. Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., and O’Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skuh. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
47. Lepper, M. (1996). Cognitive dissonance reduction as constraint satisfaction. Psychological Review, 103, 219-240.
48. Lightfoot, C, Bullock, M. (1990). Interpreting contradictory communications: Age and context effects. Developmental Psychology, 26, 830-836.
49. Luke, C, DeCastell, S., and Luke, A. (1983). Beyond criticism: The authority of the school text. Curriculum Inquiry 13, 111-127.
50. Markman, E. M. (1977). Realizing that you don’t understand: A preliminary investigation. Child Development, 46, 986-992.
51. Markman, E. M. (1979). Realizing that you don’t understand: Elementary school children’s awareness of inconsistencies. Chiid Development, 50, 643-655.
52. Markman, E. M., and Gorin, L. (1981). Children’s ability to adjust their standards for evaluating comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 320-325.
53. McClelland, J. L, and Rumelhart, D. E. (1988). Explorations in parallel distributed processing. A handbook of models, programs and exercises. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
54. Miller, G. R, and Rokeach, M. (1968). Individual differences and tolerance for inconsistency. In R. E Abelson, E. Aronson, E. J. McGuire, T. M. Newcomb, M. J. Rosenberg, and E H. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Theories of cognitive consistency: A sourcebook (pp. 624-632). Chicago: Rand McNally.
55. Miyake, N., and Norman, D. A. (1979). To ask a question one must know enough to know what is not known. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 357-364.
56. Mosenthal, E (1979). Children’s strategy preferences for resolving contradictory story information under two social conditions. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 28, 323-343.
57. O’Brien, E., and Myers, J. L. (1985). When comprehension difficulty improves memory for text. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition, 11, 12-21.
58. Otero, J. (1987). Comprehension monitoring in learning from scientific text. In J. D. Novak (Ed.), Proceedings of the Second International Seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics (pp. 370-375). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
59. Otero, J. (1996). Components of comprehension monitoring in the acquisition of knowledge from science texts. In K. M. Fisher and M.R. Kibby (Eds.), Knowledge acquisition organization and use in biology (pp. 36-43). Berlin: NATO-Springer Verlag.
60. Otero, J. (1998). Influence of knowledge activation and context on comprehension monitoring of science texts. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, and A. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 145-164). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
61. Otero, J., and Campanario, J. M. (1990). Comprehension evaluation and regulation in learning from science texts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 447-460.
62. Otero, J., and Kintsch, W. (1992). Failures to detect contradictions in a text: What readers believe vs. what they read. Psychological Science, 3, 229-235.
63. Park, J., and Pak, S. (1997). Students’ responses to experimental evidence based on perceptions of causality and availability of evidence. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 57-67.
64. Peng, K., and Nisbett, R. E. (1999). Culture, dialectics and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychobgist, 54, 741-754.
65. Phillips, L., and Norris, S. E (1999). Interpreting popular reports of science: What happens when the reader’s world meets the world on paper? Interruxtionai Journal of Science Education, 21, 317-327.
66. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P W, and Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227.
67. Read, S. J., and Miller, L. C. (1994). Dissonance and balance in beliefs systems: The promise of parallel constraint satisfaction processes and connectionist modeling approaches. In R. C. Schank and E. Langer (Eds.), Beliefs, reasoning, and decision making. Psychodogic in honor of Bob Abelson (pp. 209-235). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
68. Reif, E, and Larkin, J. (1991). Cognition in scientific and everyday domains: Comparison and learning implications. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 733-760.
69. Roberts, R. M., Kreuz, R. J., Gilbert, D. K., and Bainbridge, E. A. (1994). Discourse expectation and perceived coherence. In H. van Oostendorp and R. Zwaan (Eds.), Naturalistic text comprehension (pp. 189-202). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
70. Rowell, J. A., and Pollard, J. M. (1995). Raising awareness of uncertainty: A useful addendum to courses in the history and philosophy of science for science teachers? Science and Education, 4, 87-97.
71. Rukavina, I., and Daneman, M. (1996). Integration and its effect on acquiring knowledge about competing scientific theories from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 272-287.
72. Shultz, T. R., and Lepper, M. R. (1996). Cognitive dissonance reduction as constraint satisfaction. Psychological Review, 103, 219-240.
73. Tapiero, I., and Otero, J. (1999). Distinguishing between textbase and situation model in the processing of inconsistent information: Elaboration versus tagging. In H. van Oostendorp and S. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 341-365). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
74. van den Broek, E, Risden, K., and Husebye-Hartmann, E. (1994). The role of readers’ standards for coherence in the generation of inferences during reading. In R. E Lorch and E. J. O’Brien (Eds.), Sources of coherence in text comprehension (pp. 353-373). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
75. van der Meij, H. (1988). Constraints on question asking in classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 401-405.
76. van Dijk, T, and Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
77. van Oostendorp, H. (1994). Text processing in terms of semantic cohesion monitoring. In H. van Oostendorp and R. Zwaan (Eds.), Naturalistic text comprehension (pp. 35-55). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
78. van Oostendorp, H, Otero, J., and Campanario, J. M. (in press). Conditions of updating during reading. In M. Louwerse and W. Van Peer (Eds.), Thematics: Interdisciplinary studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
79. Wilkes, A. L., and Leatherbarrow, M. (1988). Editing episodic memory following the identification of error. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40A (2), 361-387.
80. Yager, S. O., and Yager, R. E. (1985). Changes in perceptions on science for third, seventh and eleventh grade students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, 347-358.
81. Zabrucky, K. (1986). The role of factual coherence in discourse comprehension. Discourse Processes, 9, 197-220.
82. Zabrucky, K., and Ratner, H. (1986). Children’s comprehension monitoring and recall of inconsistent stories. Child Development, 57, 1401-1418.
83. Zabrucky, K., and Ratner, H. H. (1989). Effects of reading ability on children’s comprehension evaluation and regulation. Journal of Reading Behavior, 21, 69-83.
84. Zabrucky, K., and Ratner, H. H. (1992). Effects of passage type on comprehension monitoring and recall in good and poor readers. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24, 373-391.