Seeking Alternatives: How Task Instruction Affects Comprehension of Texts with Conflicting Information

IF 1.2 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Lin-Zhi Guo
{"title":"Seeking Alternatives: How Task Instruction Affects Comprehension of Texts with Conflicting Information","authors":"Lin-Zhi Guo","doi":"10.1080/02702711.2021.2008072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study investigated whether task instruction affected comprehension of multiple conflicting-view texts after controlling for a number of individual difference variables and whether the effects of task instruction varied as a result of post-reading assessment tasks. Recruited from a First-Year Composition course, 64 participants received a task instruction that set the goal of seeking an alternative explanation and reframed argument as a process of conversation and exploration. Multiple-text comprehension was measured by a synthesis writing task and an argument writing task. The results showed that participants given the instruction outperformed participants in the control condition, as reflected in their argument writing. Among the control variables, beliefs about argumentation, need for cognition and topic interest were positively correlated with comprehension measures. These results highlight the importance of cultivating divergent thinking of multiple perspectives rather than dichotomous thinking of pros and cons. Pedagogical implications are discussed.","PeriodicalId":46567,"journal":{"name":"Reading Psychology","volume":"43 1","pages":"40 - 69"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reading Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2021.2008072","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This study investigated whether task instruction affected comprehension of multiple conflicting-view texts after controlling for a number of individual difference variables and whether the effects of task instruction varied as a result of post-reading assessment tasks. Recruited from a First-Year Composition course, 64 participants received a task instruction that set the goal of seeking an alternative explanation and reframed argument as a process of conversation and exploration. Multiple-text comprehension was measured by a synthesis writing task and an argument writing task. The results showed that participants given the instruction outperformed participants in the control condition, as reflected in their argument writing. Among the control variables, beliefs about argumentation, need for cognition and topic interest were positively correlated with comprehension measures. These results highlight the importance of cultivating divergent thinking of multiple perspectives rather than dichotomous thinking of pros and cons. Pedagogical implications are discussed.
寻找替代方案:任务教学如何影响信息冲突文本的理解
摘要本研究考察了在控制了多个个体差异变量后,任务指导是否会影响多冲突视点文本的理解,以及任务指导的影响是否会因阅读后评估任务的不同而发生变化。从一年级的写作课程中招募来的64名参与者接受了一项任务指导,该任务设定了寻找另一种解释的目标,并将争论重新定义为对话和探索的过程。多文本理解通过综合写作任务和论证写作任务来衡量。结果显示,接受指导的参与者表现优于对照组的参与者,这反映在他们的论点写作上。在控制变量中,论证信念、认知需求和话题兴趣与理解测度呈正相关。这些结果强调了培养多角度的发散性思维的重要性,而不是赞成和反对的二元思维。讨论了教学意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Reading Psychology
Reading Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
7.10%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: Prepared exclusively by professionals, this refereed journal publishes original manuscripts in the fields of literacy, reading, and related psychology disciplines. Articles appear in the form of completed research; practitioner-based "experiential" methods or philosophical statements; teacher and counselor preparation services for guiding all levels of reading skill development, attitudes, and interests; programs or materials; and literary or humorous contributions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信