東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Strategy and bias in comprehension o...

Kim, Jong-Yun.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Strategy and bias in comprehension of multiple texts: How do readers with topic beliefs use strategies when reading controversial documents?

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Strategy and bias in comprehension of multiple texts: How do readers with topic beliefs use strategies when reading controversial documents?/
作者:	Kim, Jong-Yun.
面頁冊數:	321 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-03(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International76-03A(E).
標題:	Reading instruction. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3644139
ISBN:	9781321321968

Strategy and bias in comprehension of multiple texts: How do readers with topic beliefs use strategies when reading controversial documents?
Kim, Jong-Yun.

Strategy and bias in comprehension of multiple texts: How do readers with topic beliefs use strategies when reading controversial documents? - 321 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-03(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Maryland, College Park, 2014.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

Research on multiple text comprehension reveals key principles and elements of comprehension: readers' mental representation, cognitive text processing, and strategy use while reading multiple texts (Goldman, 2004; Rouet, 2006). However, many studies of multiple text comprehension fail to investigate the influence of reader bias. Grounded in both the literature on reading strategies and the social psychology literature on bias (e.g., Edwards & Smith, 1996), this study investigated how readers' topic beliefs influence comprehension strategies in relation to bias.

ISBN: 9781321321968Subjects--Topical Terms:

2122756
Reading instruction.

Strategy and bias in comprehension of multiple texts: How do readers with topic beliefs use strategies when reading controversial documents?
LDR:03682nmm a2200301 4500 001 2059311
005 20150728123739.5
008 170521s2014 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781321321968
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3644139
035 $a AAI3644139
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Kim, Jong-Yun. $3 3173369
245 1 0 $a Strategy and bias in comprehension of multiple texts: How do readers with topic beliefs use strategies when reading controversial documents?
300 $a 321 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-03(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Peter P. Afflerbach.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Maryland, College Park, 2014.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a Research on multiple text comprehension reveals key principles and elements of comprehension: readers' mental representation, cognitive text processing, and strategy use while reading multiple texts (Goldman, 2004; Rouet, 2006). However, many studies of multiple text comprehension fail to investigate the influence of reader bias. Grounded in both the literature on reading strategies and the social psychology literature on bias (e.g., Edwards & Smith, 1996), this study investigated how readers' topic beliefs influence comprehension strategies in relation to bias.
520 $a The participants for this study were 15 undergraduate students, chosen as they represented three distinct topic beliefs related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There were 5 pro-Israel, 5, pro-Palestine, and 5 neutral participants. While thinking-aloud, participants read two maps and five texts about Israeli settlements in the West Bank, and the ongoing Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The texts and maps were presented in the iMTC (internet-embedded Multiple-Text Comprehension measurement tool) environment (Kim & Cho, 2011). In addition, measures of participants' prior knowledge and topic beliefs were gathered, while their reading times and Internet searches were recorded by the iMTC. Participants' verbal reports were coded based on existing coding schemes for reading strategies (Goldman et al., 2012; Pressley & Afflerbach, 1995). Five families of strategy were determined: Considering text content, Acceptance and resistance, Monitoring, Evaluation, and Information need and search.
520 $a The study has three major findings. First, initial belief differences between groups of different beliefs increased after reading, meaning that participants showed biased assimilation processing during reading. Second, the participants' biased processing was not detected in the three types of reading measures: reading times, reading orders, and Internet searches. Finally, the study found that participants with different topic beliefs showed different strategic patterns in relation to bias. In particular, acceptance and resistance distinguished the three participant groups' strategic processing. Participants accepted belief-consistent text information and resisted belief-inconsistent text information. In addition, three cases of participants' biased strategy use were qualitatively analyzed. The analyses demonstrated that participants' topic beliefs played a role in creating an interpretive framework that evaluated, accepted, or resisted information during reading. The findings, limitations, implications for future research and instructional practices are discussed.
590 $a School code: 0117.
650 4 $a Reading instruction. $3 2122756
690 $a 0535
710 2 $a University of Maryland, College Park. $b Curriculum and Instruction. $3 1022765
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 76-03A(E).
790 $a 0117
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2014
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3644139