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]	刘颖, 刘儒德, 毛晨莹, 林静敏, 刘佳彬. 在线视频学习中教师反馈时间和反馈复杂性对大学生学习投入的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2026, 42(3): 408-417.
[2]	万欢兰, 牛宇洁, 王博晨, 金灿灿. 大学生人生目标、自我控制和学业倦怠间的关系:一项纵向研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2026, 42(3): 418-426.
[3]	张梅, 黄扬, 于嘉雯, 黄四林. 媒体多任务对大学生阅读绩效的影响：任务难度和类型的调节[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2026, 42(2): 222-233.
[4]	赵笑梅, 赵昕睿, 王珂珂. 大学生图文信息知识整合的加工:来自ERP的证据[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2026, 42(1): 18-27.
[5]	丁越, 刘力嘉, 寇彧. 互联网时代的大学生人际关系满意度:线上积极反馈与感知社会支持的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2026, 42(1): 39-49.
[6]	王祯, 史保莹, 赵好莉, 郭云飞, 王恩国. 情感教学代理的情绪表达和角色对视频学习的影响:学习者经验的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2026, 42(1): 60-69.
[7]	魏军, 羿聪, 周溪亭. 大学生基于学业表现的自我价值感与学业内卷行为的关联:基于潜变量增长模型分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(5): 692-700.
[8]	焦姣, 牡丹, 史璐. 亲密关系满意度对大学生主观幸福感的影响:一项日记追踪研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(5): 720-729.
[9]	胡心怡, 陈英和. 大学生新目标投入能力、自我损耗与幸福感的关系:生命意义感的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(3): 348-356.
[10]	谢莉, 金辉, 王志英, 胡宇飞, 杨喜兰, 席娟. 脱贫内生动力对贫困大学生学习投入的影响:自我控制的中介作用和社会支持的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(3): 386-397.
[11]	赵笑梅, 程释, 刘子涵, 刘红. 不同语言条件和执行功能对大学生记忆整合的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(2): 153-162.
[12]	廖晨曦, 王大华. 大学生依恋对自尊和人际适应的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(2): 196-205.
[13]	郭滢, 陈晓丹, 刘文志, 刘雨彤, 朱皕. 青少年语义错误记忆发展:学习测验因素[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(1): 12-21.
[14]	相硕琪, 李亚丹, 叶超群, 杨伟星, 郭习佩, 张玲玲, 胡卫平. 创造焦虑与日常创造力的关系: 认知灵活性和创造性参与过程的链式中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(1): 32-41.
[15]	史滋福, 周志豪, 许磊, 陈火红, 管锦亮, 刘承珍. 父母消极教养方式与大学生恶意创造性行为的关系:有调节的中介模型[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(6): 808-815.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed