Learning from texts that refute the reader's prior knowledge

Abstract Most research on the effect of prior knowledge on reading comprehension has concerned knowledge that is congruent with the information in the text. This study investigated the effect of prior knowledge that is incongruent with the text and the effect of three different text structures on fifth‐and sixth‐graders’ comprehension. There was no effect for condition of prior knowledge. Text structures that explicitly contrasted the reader's misconception with the correct information were more effective, as measured by both free recall and questions, than texts that simply stated the correct information. Explicit recall of elements of contrast structure was positively related to recall of correct information. Recalls from poor comprehenders often listed the misconception and the correct information without signaling the contradiction. Recalls from good comprehenders showed a preference for a contrast structure in which the misconception is given first, followed by the refutation.

[1]  D. Rumelhart.  NOTES ON A SCHEMA FOR STORIES , 1975 .

[2]  J. Novak,et al.  An assessment of children's concepts of the earth utilizing structured interviews , 1976 .

[3]  K. Stanovich.  TOWARD AN INTERACTIVE-COMPENSATORY MODEL OF INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF READING FLUENCY , 1980 .

[4]  Judith A. Langer.  Facilitating Text Processing: The Elaboration of Prior Knowledge. , 1979 .

[5]  D. Bobrow,et al.  Representation and Understanding: Studies in Cognitive Science , 1975 .

[6]  J. Peeck,et al.  Effect of mobilizing prior knowledge on learning from text. , 1982 .

[7]  B. Meyer.  Use of Top-Level Structure in Text: Key for Reading Comprehension of Ninth-Grade Students. , 1980 .

[8]  Michael Shayer,et al.  The development of the concepts of heat and temperature in 10‐13 year‐olds , 1981 .

[9]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Models of Competence in Solving Physics Problems , 1980, Cogn. Sci..

[10]  Priscilla A. Drum,et al.  The Effects of Surface Structure Variables on Performance in Reading Comprehension Tests. , 1981 .

[11]  R. Siegler.  How Knowledge Influences Learning. , 1983 .

[12]  Esther Geva,et al.  Facilitating Reading Comprehension through Flowcharting. , 1983 .

[13]  M. Y. Lipson,et al.  Learning New Information from Text: The Role of Prior Knowledge and Reading Ability , 1982 .

[14]  David K. Dickinson,et al.  Story comprehension and recall in dyslexic students , 1979 .

[15]  Rand J. Spiro,et al.  Etiology of reading comprehension style , 1979 .

[16]  Geoffrey Underwood,et al.  The effects of sentence context in good and poor readers: A test of Stanovich's interactive-compensatory model. , 1984 .

[17]  K. Maria,et al.  Reading comprehension disabilities: Knowledge structures and non-accommodating text processing strategies , 1982 .

[18]  Betty C. Holmes.  The Effect of Prior Knowledge on the Question Answering of Good and Poor Readers , 1983 .

[19]  J. Piaget.  The Language and Thought of the Child , 1927 .

[20]  Richard C. Anderson.  Becoming a Nation of Readers: The Report of the Commission on Reading , 1985 .

[21]  Donna E. Alvermann,et al.  Prior Knowledge Activation and the Comprehension of Compatible and Incompatible Text. , 1985 .