Skip to main content Accessibility help
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 75
  • Print publication year: 2012
  • Online publication date: June 2012

13 - Learning with Multiple Documents

from Part C - Learning Processes and Mental Structures that Support Quality of Learning

Related content

Powered by UNSILO


Azevedo, R., Guthrie, J. G., & Seibert, D. (2004). The role of self-regulated learning in fostering students’ conceptual understanding of complex systems with hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30, 87–111.
Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., Sandora, C., Kucan, L., & Worthy, J. (1996). Questioning the author: A yearlong classroom implementation to engage students with text. Elementary School Journal, 96, 385–414.
Bjork, R. A., & Linn, M. C. (2006). The science of learning and the learning of science: Introducing desirable difficulties. American Psychological Society Observer, 19, 29, 39.
Braasch, J. L., Rouet, J.-F., Britt, M. A., Knutsen, D., Le Bigot, L., & Vibert, N. (2010). Readers’ construction of document models from news stories: Evidence from eye movements. Paper presented at the EARLI Special Interest Group “Comprehension of Texts and Graphics” Conference, August, Tuebingen, Germany.
Bråten, I., Britt, M.A., Strømsø, H. I., & Rouet, J.-F. (2011). The role of epistemic beliefs in the comprehension of multiple expository texts: Towards an integrated model. Educational Psychologist.
Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2006). Effects of personal epistemology on the understanding of multiple texts. Reading Psychology, 27, 457–484.
Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Britt, M. A. (2009). Trust matters: Examining the role of source evaluation in students’ construction of meaning within and across multiple texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 44, 6–28.
Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Samuelstuen, M. S. (2008). Are sophisticated students always better? The role of topic-specific personal epistemology in the understanding of multiple expository texts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 814–840.
Brem, S. K., Russell, J., & Weems, L. (2001). Science on the Web: Student evaluations of scientific arguments. Discourse Processes, 32, 191–213.
Britt, M. A., & Aglinskas, C. (2002). Improving student’s ability to use source information. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 485–522.
Britt, M. A., & Gabrys, G. (2002). Implications of document-level literacy skills for web-site design. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 34, 170–176.
Britt, M. A., Kurby, C. A., Dandotkar, S., & Wolfe, C. R. (2008). I agreed with what? Memory for simple argument claims. Discourse Processes, 45, 52–84.
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: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Britt, M. A., Perfetti, C. A., Van Dyke, J., & Gabrys, G. (2000). The Sourcer’s Apprentice: A tool for document-supported history instruction. In P. Stearns (Ed.), Knowing, teaching and learning history: National and international perspectives. New York: NYU Press.
Britt, M. A., & Sommer, J. (2004). Facilitating textual integration with macro-structure focusing task. Reading Psychology, 25, 313–339.
Britt, M. A., Wiemer-Hasting, P., Larson, A., & Perfetti, C. A. (2004). Automated feedback on source citation in essay writing. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 14, 359–374.
Chambliss, M. J., & Murphy, P. K. (2002). Fourth and fifth graders representing the argument structure in written texts. Discourse Processes, 34, 91–115.
Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 214–257.
Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39–72.
Gentner, D., & Stevens, A. (1983). Mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gil, L., Bråten, I., Vidal-Abarca, E., & Strømsø, H. I. (2010). Understanding and integrating multiple science texts: Summary tasks are sometimes better than argument tasks. Reading Psychology, 31, 30–68.
Golder, C. & Coirier, P. (1994). Argumentative text writing: Developmental trends. Discourse Processes, 18, 187–210.
Goldman, S., Lawless, K., Gomez, K., Braasch, B., MacLeod, S., & Manning, F. (2010). Literacy in the Digital World: Comprehending and Learning from Multiple Sources. In M. G. McKeown, & L. Kucan (Eds.), Bringing reading researchers to life: Essays in honor of Isabel Beck. New York: Guilford Press.
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.
Johnson-Laird, P. (1983). Mental models. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kelly, G. J., Druker, S., & Chen, C. (1998). Students’ reasoning about electricity: combining performance assessments with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 849–871.
Kim, J., & Millis, K. (2006). The influence of sourcing and relatedness on event integration. Discourse Processes, 41, 51–65.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163–182.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Knudson, R. E. (1992). The development of written argumentation: An analysis and comparison of argumentative writing at four grade levels. Child Study Journal, 22, 167–184.
Knudson, R. E. (1994). An analysis of persuasive discourse: Learning how to take a stand. Discourse Processes, 18, 211–230.
Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77, 319–337.
Kurby, C. A., Britt, M. A., & Magliano, J. P. (2005). The role of top-down and bottom-up processes in between-text integration. Reading Psychology, 26, 335–362.
Larson, A. A., Britt, M. A., & Kurby, C. (2009). Improving students’ evaluation of informal arguments. Journal of Experimental Education, 77, 339–365.
Larson, M., Britt, M. A., & Larson, A. (2004). Disfluencies in comprehending argumentative texts. Reading Psychology, 25, 205–224.
Le Bigot, L., & Rouet, J.-F. (2007). The impact of presentation format, task assignment, and prior knowledge on students’ comprehension of multiple online documents. Journal of Literacy Research, 39, 445–470.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 994–1020.
Perfetti, C. A., Britt, M. A., & Georgi, M. C. (1995). Text-based learning and reasoning: Studies in history. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Perfetti, C. A., Britt, M. A., Rouet, J-F., Georgi, M. C. & Mason, R. A. (1994). How students use texts to learn and reason about historical uncertainty. In M. Carretero & J.F. Voss (Eds.) Cognitive and instructional processes in history and the social sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Perfetti, C. A., Rouet, J.-F., & Britt, M. A. (1999). Towards a theory of documents representation. In H. van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pieschl, S., Stahl, E., & Bromme, R. (2008). Epistemological beliefs and self-regulated learning with hypertext. Metacognition and Learning, 3, 17–37.
Rouet, J.-F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to Web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rouet, J.-F., & Britt, M. A. (2011). Relevance processes in multiple document comprehension. In M.T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 19–52). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Rouet, J.-F., Britt, M. A., Caroux, L., Nivet, C., & Le Bigot, L. (2009). The influence of story consistency and reading context on the construction of documents models from multiple sources. Paper presented at the 2009 EARLI Conference, August, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Rouet, J.-F., Britt, M. A., Mason, R. A., & Perfetti, C. A. (1996).Using multiple sources of evidence to reason about history. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 478–493.
Rouet, J.-F., & Coutelet, B. (2008). The acquisition of information search skills by 9 to 13 year-old students. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 389–406.
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, 85–106.
Rouet, J.-F., Ros, C., Goumi, A., Macedo-Rouet, A., & Dinet, J. (2011). The influence of surface and deep cues on grade school students’ assessment of relevance in Web menus. Learning and Instruction, 21, 205–219.
Rouet, J.-F., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2002). “Mining for meaning”: a cognitive examination of inserted questions in learning from scientific text. In J. Otero, J. A. Leon, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 417–436). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rouet, J.-F., Vidal-Abarca, E., Bert-Erboul, A. & Millogo, V. (2001). Effects of information search tasks on the comprehension of instructional text. Discourse Processes, 31, 163–186.
Schworm, S., & Renkl, A. (2007). Learning argumentation skills through the use of prompts for self-explaining examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 285–296.
Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2009). Learning in a sheltered Internet environment: The use of Webquests. Learning and Instruction, 19, 423–432.
Seixas, P. (1994). When psychologists discuss historical thinking: A historian’s perspective. Educational Psychologist, 29, 107–109.
Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Arlington, VA: Rand Reading Study Group.
Stadtler, M., & Bromme, R. (2007). Dealing with multiple documents on the WWW: The role of metacognition in the formation of documents models. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 2, 191–210.
Stadtler, M., & Bromme, R. (2008). Effects of the metacognitive computer-tool met.a.ware on the web search of laypersons. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 716–737.
Stein, N. L., & Glenn, C. G. (1979). An analysis of story comprehension in elementary school children. In R. O. Freedle (Ed.), New directions in discourse processing (pp. 53–120). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
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., & Samuelstuen, M. S. (2008). Dimensions of topic-specific epistemological beliefs as predictors of multiple text understanding. Learning and Instruction, 18, 513–527.
Takao, A. Y., & Kelly, G. J. (2003). Assessment of evidence in university students’ scientific writing. Science & Education, 12, 341–363.
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wiley, J. (2001). Supporting understanding through task and browser design. In Proceedings of the Twenty-third annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1136–1143). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wiley, J., Goldman, S., Graesser, A., Sanchez. C., Ash, I., & Hemmerich, J. (2009). Source evaluation, comprehension, and learning in internet science inquiry tasks. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 1060–1106.
Wiley, J., Griffin, T. D., & Thiede, K. W. (2005). Putting the comprehension in metacomprehension. Journal of General Psychology, 132, 408–428.
Wiley, J., & Voss, J. F. (1999). Constructing arguments from multiple sources: Tasks that promote understanding not just memory for text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 301–311.
WineburgS. S. (1991). Historical problem solving: A study of the cognitive processes used in the evaluation of documentary and pictorial evidence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 73–87.
Wineburg, S. S. (1994). The cognitive representation of historical texts. In J. Castellan, D. B. Pisoni, & G. Potts (Eds.), Teaching and learning in history (pp. 85–135). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wineburg, S. S. (2000). Making historical sense. In P. Stearns, P. Seixas, & S. Wineburg (Eds.), Knowing, teaching and learning history: National and international perspectives (pp. 306–325). New York: NYU Press.
Wolfe, C. R., Britt, M. A., & Butler, J. A. (2009). Argumentation schema and the myside bias in written argumentation. Written Communication, 26, 183–209.