Reading science texts online: Does source information influence the identification of contradictions within texts?

The present study investigated the influence of the source of information on high-school students' identification of contradictions within online science texts. A pilot study with N?=?92 high-school students showed that their expectations regarding the quality of an online text differed significantly depending on the type of the source (i.e., on the authoritativeness of the website and the author's expertise). In the main study N?=?161 high-school students read a science text that contained four text-internal contradictions and that varied regarding the authoritativeness of the website on which the text was presented (authoritative vs. non-authoritative website) and the author of the text (expert vs. layperson). After reading, a Conflict Verification Task (CVT) was applied to measure students' identification of the conflicting information. The results indicate that students' identification of contradictions differs as a function of website authoritativeness and author expertise. Both in a text stemming from an unambiguously authoritative source ("expert author/authoritative website") and in a text stemming from an unambiguously non-authoritative source ("lay author/non-authoritative website") students identified more contradictions than in a text stemming from a source whose authoritativeness is ambiguous ("lay author/authoritative website" or "expert author/non-authoritative website"). Students' identification of contradictions in an online science text was examined.Influence of source type (type of website and author) of the text was examined.Source type influenced students' quality expectations of online texts.Source type influenced students' identification of contradictions.

[1]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Failures to Detect Contradictions in a Text: What Readers Believe versus what they Read , 1992 .

[2]  Burcin Acar Sesen,et al.  Internet as a Source of Misconception: "Radiation and Radioactivity" , 2010 .

[3]  R. Vetter,et al.  Radiation and Radioactivity , 2016 .

[4]  Miriam J. Metzger,et al.  behaviors on the perceived credibility of web-based information The role of site features, user attributes, and information verification , 2007 .

[5]  José Otero,et al.  Comprehension evaluation and regulation in learning from science texts , 1990 .

[6]  Nicolas Vibert,et al.  Readers’ use of source information in text comprehension , 2011, Memory & Cognition.

[7]  Saskia Brand-Gruwel,et al.  How students evaluate information and sources when searching the World Wide Web for information , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[8]  Jason L. G. Braasch,et al.  Promoting secondary school students’ evaluation of source features of multiple documents , 2013 .

[9]  N. Krämer,et al.  Information Selection in the Blogosphere: The Effect of Expertise, Community Rating, and Age , 2010 .

[10]  Peter Gerjets,et al.  Quellenbewertungen und Quellenverweise bei Lesen und Zusammenfassen wissensbezogener Informationen aus multiplen Webseiten , 2014 .

[11]  James M. Royer.  Developing Reading and Listening Comprehension Tests Based on the Sentence Verification Technique (SVT). , 2001 .

[12]  Peter Johnston,et al.  Comprehension Monitoring and the Error Detection Paradigm , 1982 .

[13]  Lucia Mason,et al.  Epistemic evaluation and comprehension of web-source information on controversial science-related topics: Effects of a short-term instructional intervention , 2014, Comput. Educ..

[14]  Ivan K. Ash,et al.  Source Evaluation, Comprehension, and Learning in Internet Science Inquiry Tasks , 2009 .

[15]  R. Bromme,et al.  Dealing With Uncertainty: Readers' Memory for and Use of Conflicting Information From Science Texts as Function of Presentation Format and Source Expertise , 2013 .

[16]  Soo Young Rieh.  Judgment of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[17]  Soo Young Rieh.  Judgement of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web , 2002 .

[18]  Adult and adolescent readers' comprehension monitoring performance: An investigation of monitoring accuracy and related eye movements , 1991 .

[19]  Susan E. Sporte,et al.  The Use of Technology in Chicago Public Schools 2011: Perspectives from Students, Teachers, and Principals. Research Brief. , 2013 .

[20]  Nian-Shing Chen,et al.  A creative thinking approach to enhancing the web-based problem solving performance of university students , 2014, Comput. Educ..

[21]  Saskia Brand-Gruwel,et al.  Fostering students’ evaluation behaviour while searching the internet , 2013 .

[22]  Peter Gerjets,et al.  Competent information search in the World Wide Web: Development and evaluation of a web training for pupils , 2008, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[23]  L. Baker.  Metacognition, comprehension monitoring, and the adult reader , 1989 .

[24]  E. Lynch,et al.  The role of social cognition in comprehension monitoring , 1988 .

[25]  Diane August,et al.  Comparison of Comprehension Monitoring of Skilled and Less Skilled Readers. , 1984 .

[26]  L. Baker,et al.  Comprehension Monitoring: Identifying and Coping with Text Confusions1 , 1979 .

[27]  Juan Miguel Campanario,et al.  Influence of subject matter setting on comprehension monitoring , 1996 .

[28]  Chun-Chia Lee,et al.  A hybrid approach to promoting students' web-based problem-solving competence and learning attitude , 2012, Comput. Educ..

[29]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition , 1998 .