知识验证信念对于多文本阅读理解的影响机制:阅读策略的中介效应和主题知识的调节效应

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2020.06.09

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为厘清知识验证信念对于多文本阅读理解的影响机制，本研究构建了有调节的中介模型。采用知识验证信念量表、主题知识问卷和阅读策略量表，对于173名大学生进行调查，并要求其在多文本阅读理解之后进行开放问题回答。结果显示：精致化策略和信息收集策略在知识验证信念对于多文本阅读理解的影响中起部分中介作用；知识验证信念对于精致化策略的预测作用受到主题知识的调节。该结果不但展示了知识验证信念对于多文本阅读理解的间接影响机制，也提示了主题知识的作用在于提供了选择复杂策略的自由。

关键词: 知识验证信念, 多文本阅读理解, 阅读策略, 主题知识, 大学生

Abstract: In order to clarify the specific mechanism underlying the relationship between justification belief and multiple-text comprehension, this study conducted a moderated mediation model in a sample of 173 undergraduate students. Participants' justification belief, topic knowledge, and reading strategies were measured. In addition, they were required to answer three related open-ended questions directly after reading five conflict texts on cellphone radiation. Results showed that: (1) justification belief had positive indirect effects on multiple-text comprehension separately through accumulation strategy and elaboration strategy; (2) the relationship between justification belief and elaboration strtegy was moderated by topic knowledge. Our findings identified the underlying mechanisms of justification belief on multiple-text comprehension, and further s suggested that topic knowledge play an important role in using complicated strategies.

Key words: justification belief, multiple-text comprehension, mediator, moderator, undergraduates

中图分类号:

G442

林文毅, 杨怡, 余圣陶. 知识验证信念对于多文本阅读理解的影响机制:阅读策略的中介效应和主题知识的调节效应[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(6): 708-714.

LIN Wenyi, YANG Yi, YU Shengtao. Justification Belief on Multiple-text Comprehension:Mediation of Reading Strategies and Moderation of Topic Knowledge[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2020, 36(6): 708-714.

参考文献

Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text:A multidimensional and developmental perspective.Handbook of reading research, 3(1), 285-310.
Bråten, I., Anmarkrud, Ø., Brandmo, C., & Strømsø, H. I. (2014). Developing and testing a model of direct and indirect relationships between individual differences, processing, and multiple-text comprehension.Learning and Instruction, 30, 9-24.
Braasch, J. L., Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Anmarkrud, Ø. (2014). Incremental theories of intelligence predict multiple document comprehension.Learning and Individual Differences, 31, 11-20.
Bråten, I., Ferguson, L. E., Strømsø, H. I., &Amnarkrud, Ø. (2013). Justification beliefs and multiple-documents comprehension. European Journal of Educational Psychology, 28, 879-902.
Bråten, I., Ferguson, L. E., Strømsø, H. I., & Anmarkrud, Ø. (2014). Students working with multiple conflicting documents on a scientific issue:Relations between epistemic cognition while reading and sourcing and argumentation in essays.British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(1), 58-85.
Bråten, I., Gil, L., Strømsø, H. I., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2009). Personal epistemology across cultures:Exploring Norwegian and Spanish university students' epistemic beliefs about climate change.Social Psychology of Education, 12(4), 529-560.
Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2010a). When law students read multiple documents about global warming:Examining the role of topic-specific beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing. Instructional Science, 38, 635-657.
Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2010b). Effects of task instruction and personal epistemology on the understanding of multiple texts about climate change.Discourse Processes, 47, 1-31.
Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2011). Measuring strategic processing when students read multiple texts. Metacognition and Learning, 6(2), 111-130.
Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Salmeron, L. (2011). Trust and mistrust when students read multiple information sources about climate change. Learning and Instruction, 21, 180-192.
Britt, M. A., & Rouet, J. F. (2012). Learning with multiple documents:Component skills and their acquisition. Enhancing the quality of learning:Dispositions, instruction, and learning processes, 276-314.
Britt, M.A., Rouet, J.F., & Braasch, J.L.G. (2013). Documents as entities:Extending the situation model theory of comprehension. In M.A. Britt, S.R. Goldman, & J.F. Rouet (Eds.),Reading:From words to multiple texts (pp. 160-179). New York:Routledge.
De La Paz, S., & Wissinger, D. R. (2015). Effects of genre and content knowledge on historical thinking with academically diverse high school students.The Journal of Experimental Education, 83(1), 110-129.
Ferguson, L. E., Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Anmarkrud, Ø. (2013). Epistemic beliefs and comprehension in the context of reading multiple documents:Examining the role of conflict.International Journal of Educational Research, 62, 100-114.
Hayes, Andrew F.(2013). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis:A Regression-Based Approach. New York, NY:The Guilford Press. Journal of Educational Measurement, 51(3), 335-337.
Kendeou, P., Braasch, J. L. G., & Bråten, I. (2016). Optimizing conditions for learning:situating refutations in epistemic cognition.The Journal of Experimental Education, 84(2), 245-263.
List, A. (2018). Strategies for comprehending and integrating texts and videos.Learning and Instruction, 57, 34-46.
Maier, J., & Richter, T. (2013). Text belief consistency effects in the comprehension of multiple texts with conflicting information.Cognition and Instruction, 31(2), 151-175.
Mason, L., Scrimin, S., Zaccoletti, S., Tornatora, M. C., & Goetz, T. (2018). Webpage reading:Psychophysiological correlates of emotional arousal and regulation predict multiple-text comprehension.Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 317-326.
Nadi, M., Moshfeghi, N., & Amini, M. (2018). Exploratory Relationship between Epistemological Beliefs and Self-directed Learning among Nursing Students. Iranian Journal of Medical Education, 18, 12-24.
Naumann, A. B., Wechsung, I., & Krems, J. F. (2009). How to support learning from multiple hypertext sources.Behavior Research Methods, 41(3), 639-646.
Pamuk, S., Sungur, S., & Oztekin, C. (2017). A Multilevel Analysis of Students' Science Achievements in Relation to their Self-Regulation, Epistemological Beliefs, Learning Environment Perceptions, and Teachers' Personal Characteristics.International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1-18.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research:a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88(5), 879.
Richter, T., & Maier, J. (2017). Comprehension of multiple documents with conflicting information:A two-step model of validation.Educational Psychologist, 52(3), 148-166.
Rouet, J. F., Favart, M., Britt, M. A., & Perfetti, C. A. (1997). Studying and using multiple documents in history:Effects of discipline expertise.Cognition and instruction, 15(1), 85-106.
Strømsø, H. I., & Bråten, I. (2009). Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and multiple-text comprehension among upper secondary students.Educational Psychology, 29, 425-445.
Strømsø, H. I., & Bråten, I. (2010). The role of personal epistemology in the self-regulation of Internet-based learning.Metacognition and Learning, 4, 91-111.
Strømsø, H.I., Bråten, I., & Britt, M. A. (2008). Dimensions of topic-specific epistemological beliefs as predictors of multiple text understanding.Learning and Instruction, 18, 513-527.
Strømsø, H.I., Bråten, I., & Britt, M. A. (2010). Reading multiple texts about climate change:The relationship between memory for sources and text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 20, 192-204.
Sullivan, S., & Puntambekar, S. (2019). Learning with multiple online texts as part of scientific inquiry in the classroom. Computers & Education, 128, 36-51.
Yang, F. Y. (2017). Examining the reasoning of conflicting science information from the information processing perspective-an eye movement analysis.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(10), 1347-1372.
林文毅. (2018). 篇章阅读新进展——多文本阅读理解本质特征分析. 应用心理学, 24(3), 280-288.
林文毅. (2020). 多文本阅读理解中的认识论信念——实证进展及理论争议. 心理科学,43(4), 821-827.
林文毅, 张静, 徐强. (2017). 从一般领域到特殊主题:认识论信念的层次之分. 心理学探新, 37(5), 387-391.
温忠麟, 叶宝娟. (2014). 有调节的中介模型检验方法:竞争还是替补. 心理学报, 46(5), 714-726.

相关文章 15

[1]	施国春, 赵东妍, 范会勇. 2004至2016年中国大学生身体自尊的变迁:一项横断历史研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(5): 648-659.
[2]	李文福, 贾旭卿, 李功迎, 张庆林. 父母教养方式与大学生手机依赖:自我控制和感觉寻求的链式中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(5): 660-667.
[3]	魏华, 李倩, 周宗奎, 丁倩, 熊婕. 中庸思维与大学生网络成瘾:同伴冲突和性别的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(5): 668-674.
[4]	窦芬, 李巧灵, 王书豪. 自我分化与大学生经验回避:羞怯的中介作用及其性别差异[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(4): 517-524.
[5]	徐嘉, 谢宝国. 大学生的职业自我概念清晰度与抑郁的关系:性别与性别平等观的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(4): 584-591.
[6]	洪幼娟, 林斐, 刘丽婷, 林宛儒, 连榕, 林荣茂. 受害者公正敏感性对生活满意度的影响:上行社会比较和妒忌的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(4): 592-600.
[7]	高斌, 朱穗京, 吴晶玲. 大学生手机成瘾与学习投入的关系:自我控制的中介作用和核心自我评价的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(3): 400-406.
[8]	杨秀娟, 范翠英, 周宗奎, 刘庆奇, 连帅磊. 正念与手机成瘾倾向的关系:无聊倾向和未来时间洞察力的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(3): 419-428.
[9]	郑显亮, 谢方威, 丁亮, 王雪. 社会阶层与大学生网络利他行为:一个有调节的中介模型[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(2): 182-189.
[10]	刘勤学, 张聚媛, 林悦. 大学生智能手机成瘾与抑制控制能力的关系:手机位置和认知负荷的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(2): 257-265.
[11]	杨文敏, 鲁嘉晨, 谭欣, 梁静远, 雷怡. 大学生主观童年创伤症状对抑郁的影响:抗挫折能力和外向性的多重中介效应[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(1): 128-136.
[12]	刘艳, 陈建文. 大学生自尊与社会适应的关系:积极核心图式与同伴依恋的链式中介效应分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(6): 694-699.
[13]	田录梅, 潘月, 董鑫月, 孔莲. 不同社交网站使用与大学生抑郁的关系:链式中介模型[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(6): 743-752.
[14]	邱娟, 江黛苔, 段亚杰, 姚驹, 范春艳, 刘伟. 大学生网络捐助的影响因素:求助者特征的视角[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(5): 569-575.
[15]	张荣伟, 柯少菁, 连榕, 李丹. 人际交往能力与生命意义的关系:孤独感和年级的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(5): 576-583.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed