Epistemological and reading beliefs profiles and their role in multiple text comprehension

  1. Mar Mateos 1
  2. Isabel Solé 2
  3. Elena Martín 1
  4. Nuria Castells 2
  5. Isabel Cuevas 1
  6. Jara González-Lamas 1
  1. 1 Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01cby8j38

  2. 2 Universitat de Barcelona
    info

    Universitat de Barcelona

    Barcelona, España

    ROR https://ror.org/021018s57

Zeitschrift:
Electronic journal of research in educational psychology

ISSN: 1696-2095

Datum der Publikation: 2016

Ausgabe: 14

Nummer: 39

Seiten: 226-252

Art: Artikel

DOI: 10.14204/EJREP.39.1505 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen Access editor

Andere Publikationen in: Electronic journal of research in educational psychology

Ziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung

Zusammenfassung

Introduction. The aim of this study was to analyse the role of epistemological beliefs and reading beliefs in the comprehension of multiple texts which presented conflicting positions about a controversial topic (nuclear energy). More specifically, we investigated the influence of the multidimensional configuration of epistemological and reading beliefs on multiple text comprehension. Method. The participants were 476 university students from two different Spanish universities, and diverse studies (Humanities, Health Sciences, Architecture and Engineering). In a whole-class session, the Epistemological Beliefs Questionnaire (EQEBI) and the Reader Belief Questionnaire were first administered. In the second part of the session participants completed the prior knowledge questionnaire and performed the multiple text comprehension task. Results. Using cluster analysis we identified two distinct beliefs profiles: sophisticated, in which the more sophisticated epistemological beliefs were associated to more transactional and less transmissive reading beliefs; and naïve, in which the more naïve epistemological beliefs were associated to less transactional and more transmissive reading beliefs. Relationships were found between profiles and gender and domain of knowledge. In addition, after controlling prior knowledge, students with a more sophisticated epistemological and reading beliefs’ profile obtained a higher level of multiple text comprehension than those with a more naïve profile. Conclusion. Consistent with prior research, we may interpret that students who understand knowledge in a more sophisticated way tend to view reading less as a transmissive process and more transforming of knowledge; therefore, they get involved in a deeper comprehension of the different sources and this favours their ability to process information and make inferences – at an intra and inter textual level.

€ Finanzierung ansehen

Informationen zur Finanzierung

This work was funded under the National Programme for Basic Research Projects 2014–2016 by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (Grant EDU2013-46606-C2-1 & 2-R).

Geldgeber

Bibliographische Referenzen

  • Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000) Learning from text: a multidimensional and developmental perspective. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol. III, pp. 285–310). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Boscolo, P., & Mason, L. (2003). Topic knowledge, test coherence, and interest: How they interact in learning from instructional texts. Journal of Experimental Education, 71, 126-148. DOI: 10.1080/00220970309602060.
  • Bråten, I., Britt, M.A., Strømsø, H.I., & Rouet, J. F (2011). The role of epistemic beliefs in the comprehension of multiple expository texts: toward an integrated model. Educational Psychologist, 46, 48-70. DOI:10.1080/00461520.2011.538647.
  • Bråten, I., & Strømsø H.I. (2010). Effects of task instruction and personal epistemology on the understanding of multiple texts about climate change. Discourse Processes, 47, 1-31. DOI: 10.1080/01638530902959646.
  • Britt, M.A., Perfetti, C.A., Sandak, R., & Rouet, J.F. (1999). Content integration and source separation in learning from multiple texts. In S.R. Goldman, A.C. Graesser, & P.van den Broek (Eds.), Narrative, comprehension, causality and coherence: Essays in honor of Tom Trabasso (pp. 209-233). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Buehl, M.M. (2008). Assessing the multidimensionality of students’ epistemic beliefs across diverse cultures. In M.S. Khine (Wd.), Knowing, knowledge, and beliefs: Epistemological studies across diverse cultures (pp.65-112). New York: Springer.
  • Buehl, M. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2005). Motivation and performance differences in students’ domain-specific epistemological belief profiles. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 696-726. DOI: 10.3102/00028312042004697
  • Dai, D.Y. & Wang, X. (2007). The role of need for cognition and reader beliefs in text comprehension and interest development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 332-347. DOI:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.05.002
  • Everitt, B.S., Landau, S., & Leese, M. (2001). Cluster Analysis. London: Arnold.
  • Fishman, J.A. , & Galguera, T. (2003). Introduction to test construction in the social and behavioral sciences. New York: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
  • Ferguson, L.E, & Bråten, I. (2013). Students profiles of knowledge and epistemic beliefs: Changes and relations to multiple-text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 25, 49-61. DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.11.003.
  • Gil, L., Bråten, I., Vidal-Abarca, E., & Strømsø, H.I. (2010). Summary versus argument tasks when working with multiple documents: Which is better for whom? ContemporaryEducationalPsychology 35, 157-173. DOI: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.11.002
  • Goldman, S. (1997). Learning from text. Reflection on the past and suggestion for the future. Discourse Processes, 23, 357-398. DOI: 10.1080/01638539709544997
  • Hakan, K. & Münire, E. (2012). Profiling differences in undergraduates’ epistemological beliefs: gender, domain and grade differences. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 738-744. DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.133
  • Hofer, B. K. & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 88-140. DOI: 10.3102/00346543067001088
  • Hofer, B.K., & Pintrich, P.R. (Eds.). (2002). Personal epistemology. The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Jehng, J. J., Johnson, S. D. & Anderson, R. C. (1993). Schooling and students’ epistemological beliefs about learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 23-35. DOI: 10.1006/ceps.1993.1004
  • Kardash, C. M., & Scholes, R. J. (1996). Effects of pre-existing beliefs, epistemological beliefs, and need for cognition on interpretation of controversial issues. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 260-271. DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.88.2.260
  • Kerlinger, F.N., & Lee, H.B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research (4th edition). Forth Worth, TX: Harcourt College Publishers.
  • King, B. A., & Magun-Jackson, S. (2009). Epistemological beliefs of engineering students. The Journal of Technology Studies, 35, 56-64. DOI: 10.21061/jots.v35i2.a.6
  • Kienhues, D., Bromme, R., & Stahl, E. (2008). Changing epistemological beliefs: The unexpected impact of a short-term intervention. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 811-816. DOI: 10.1348/000709907X268589.
  • Lordán, E., & Solé, I. (in preparation). Differences on Undergraduate Students’ Reading Beliefs between Knowledge Domains, Academic Years and Genders.
  • Mason, N., Boldrin, A., & Zurlo, G. (2006). Epistemological understanding in different judgment domains: Relationship with gender, gender level and curriculum. International Journal Educational Research, 45, 43-56. DOI:10.1016/j.ijer.2006.08.003
  • Mateos, M., Cuevas, I., Martín, E., Martín, A., Echeita, G., & Luna, M. (2011). Reading to write an argumentation: the role of epistemological, reading and writing beliefs. Journal of Research in Reading, 34, 281–297. DOI: 10.1111/j.14679817.2010.01437.x
  • Mateos, M., & Solé, I. (2009). Synthesising information from various texts: A study of procedures and products at different educational levels. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 24, 435-451. DOI: 10.1007/BF03178760
  • Mateos, M., Villalón, R., De Dios, M. J., & Martín, E. (2007). Reading-and-writing tasks on different university degree courses: What do the students say they do? Studies in Higher Education, 32, 489-510. DOI:10.1080/03075070701476183
  • Muis, K.R., Bendixen, L.D., & Haerle, F. C. (2006) Domain-generality and domainspecificity in personal epistemology research: Philosophical and empirical reflections in the development of a theoretical framework. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 3-54. DOI 10.1007/s10648-006-9003-6
  • Nayebi, R. & Tahiri, A. (2013). A study of epistemological beliefs of EFL learners across gender and educational level. International Journal of Research Studies in Psychology, 3, 17-28. DOI: 10.5861/ijrsp.2014.754
  • Neely, M.E. (2014). Epistemological and writing beliefs in a first-year college writing course: Exploring shifts across a semester and relationships with argument quality. Journal of Writing Research, 6, 141-170.DOI:10.17339/jowr-2014.06.02.3
  • Ordoñez, X.G., Ponsoda, V., Abad, F.J., & Romero, S. J. (2009). Measurement of epistemological beliefs: Psychometric properties of the EQEBI test scores. Educational and Pshychological Measurement, 69, 287-302. DOI: 10.14718/ACP.2016.19.1.4
  • Peterson, S. S., & Parr, J. M. (2012). Gender and literacy issues and research: Placing the spotlight on writing. Journal of Writing Research, 3, 151–161. DOI:10.17239/jowr-2012.03.03.1
  • Pieschl, S., Stahl, E., & Bromme R. (2013). Adaptation to context as core component of self-regulated learning. The example of complexity and epistemic beliefs. In
  • R. Azevedo & V. Aleven (Eds.), International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies (pp. 53-65). New York: Springer.
  • Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 498-504. DOI:10.1037/00220663.82.3.498
  • Schommer, M. (1993).Epistemological development and academic performance among secondary strudents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 406-411. DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.85.3.406
  • Schommer, M. (1998). The influence of age and education on epistemological beliefs. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 551-562. DOI: 10.1111/j.20448279.1998.tb01311.x
  • Schommer-Aikins, M. (2002). An evolving theoretical framework for an epistemological belief system. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp.103-118). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Schraw, G. (2000). Reader beliefs and meaning construction in narrative text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 96-106. DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.92.1.96
  • Schraw, G., Bendixen, L.D., & Dunkle, M.E. (2002). Development and validation of the Epistemic Belief Inventory (EBI). In B.K. Hofer & P.R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp.261-275). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Schraw, G., & Bruning, R. (1996). Readers’ implicit models of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 290-305. DOI: 10.1598/RRQ.31.3.4
  • Simpson, M. L. & Nist, S. L. (2000) An update on strategic learning: it’s more than textbook reading strategies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 43, 528–541. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40016831
  • Solé, I., Mateos, M., Miras, M., Martín, E., Castells, N., Cuevas, I., & Grácia, M. (2005). Lectura, escritura y adquisición de conocimientos en educación secundaria y educación universitaria. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 28, 329-347. DOI: 10.1174/0210370054740241
  • Tynjälä, P. (2001). Writing, learning and the development of expertise in Higher Education. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Eds.), Writing as a learning tool. Integrating theory and practice (pp. 37-56). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet