Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Prediction of learning and comprehension when adolescents read multiple texts: the roles of word-level processing, strategic approach, and reading motivation

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Sixty-five Norwegian 10th graders used the software Read&Answer 2.0 (Vidal-Abarca et al., 2011) to read five different texts presenting conflicting views on the controversial scientific issue of sun exposure and health. Participants were administered a multiple-choice topic-knowledge measure before and after reading, a word recognition task, and a reading motivation inventory that included two dimensions: Science reading self-efficacy, focusing on readers’ beliefs about their capabilities to comprehend what they read in science, and science reading task value, focusing on readers’ beliefs about how important, useful, and interesting it is to comprehend science texts. In addition, strategic reading pattern was assessed in terms of the degree of non-linear reading behavior. Multiple regression analysis showed that word recognition skills strongly predicted learning from the texts, as assessed by participants’ increase in topic knowledge. However, when multiple-text comprehension indicated by performance on open-ended short-essay questions was the dependent variable, not only word recognition but also strategic reading pattern and science reading self-efficacy emerged as unique predictors when topic knowledge was controlled for. Science reading task value was not related to performance. This study provides new evidence that new literacy competencies needed in a knowledge society, such as synthesizing or integrating across multiple conflicting sources of information, still largely involve word-level, strategic, and motivational processes that may profitably be targeted through systematic instruction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Please note that Rukavina and Daneman (1996) themselves modeled the direct integrative questions after Kuhn, Amsel, and O’Loughlin (1988), who examined students’ abilities to reconcile theory and facts when presented with two different accounts on a historical event.

References

  • Afflerbach, P., & Cho, B.-Y. (2009). Identifying and describing constructively responsive comprehension strategies in new and traditional forms of reading. In S. E. Israel & G. G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp. 69–90). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P. A., & Fox, E. (2011). Adolescents as readers. In M. L. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moje, & P. P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 4, pp. 156–176). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 285–310). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, L., Cipielewski, J., & Stanovich, K. (1992). Multiple indicators of children’s reading habits and attitudes: Construct validity and cognitive correlates. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 489–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. C. (2004). Role of the reader’s schema in comprehension, learning, and memory. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (3rd ed., pp. 594–606). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andreassen, R., & Bråten, I. (2010). Examining the prediction of reading comprehension on different multiple-choice tests. Journal of Research in Reading, 33, 263–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anmarkrud, Ø., & Bråten, I. (2009). Motivation for reading comprehension. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 252–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anmarkrud, Ø., Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2011). Multiple-documents literacy: Strategic processing, source awareness, and argumentation when reading multiple conflicting documents (submitted).

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, M., McElvany, N., & Kortenbruck, M. (2010). Intrinsic and extrinsic reading motivation as predictors of reading literacy: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 773–785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, L. C., & Perfetti, C. A. (1994). Reading skill: Some adult comparisons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 244–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Björnsson, C. H. (1968). Läsbarhet [Readability]. Stockholm: Liber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Block, C. C., & Parris, S. R. (Eds.). (2008). Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (2nd ed., pp. 19–37). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bråten, I. (1994). Learning to spell. Training orthographic problem-solving with poor spellers: A strategy instructional approach. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bråten, I., Britt, M. A., Strømsø, H. I., & Rouet, J.-F. (2011). The role of epistemic beliefs in the comprehension of multiple expository texts: Toward an integrated model. Educational Psychologist, 46, 48–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bråten, I., Lie, A., Andreassen, R., & Olaussen, B. S. (1999). Leisure time reading and orthographic processes in word recognition among Norwegian third- and fourth-grade students. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 11, 65–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2010a). Effects of task instruction and personal epistemology on the understanding of multiple texts about climate change. Discourse Processes, 47, 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2010b). 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Britt, M. A., & Aglinskas, C. (2002). Improving students’ ability to identify and use source information. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 485–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Britt, M. A., & Rouet, J. F. (in press). Learning with multiple documents: Component skills and their acquisition. In M. J. Lawson & J. R. Kirby (Eds.), The quality of learning: Dispositions, instruction, and mental structures. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Coté, N., Goldman, S. R., & Saul, E. U. (1998). Students making sense of informational text: Relations between processing and representation. Discourse Processes, 25, 1–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, A. E., Stanovich, K. E., & Wilson, M. R. (1990). Cognitive variation in adult college students differing in reading ability. In T. H. Carr & B. A. Levy (Eds.), Reading and its development: Component skills approaches (pp. 129–159). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N. K., Pressley, M., & Hilden, K. (2004). Difficulties with reading comprehension. In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & K. Apel (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (pp. 501–520). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the achiever: The structure of adolescents’ academic achievement related-beliefs and self-perceptions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 215–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., & Schiefele, U. (1998). Motivation to succeed. In W. Damon & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (pp. 1017–1095). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, L. E., Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Anmarkrud, Ø. (2012). Dimensionality and change in epistemic beliefs when adolescents read conflicting information presented in multiple documents (submitted).

  • Fox, E. (2009). The role of reader characteristics in processing and learning from informational text. Review of Educational Research, 79, 197–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garner, R. (1987). Strategies for reading and studying expository text. Educational Psychologist, 22, 299–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, S. R. (2004). Cognitive aspects of constructing meaning through and across multiple texts. In N. Shuart-Faris & D. Bloome (Eds.), Uses of intertextuality in classroom and educational research (pp. 317–351). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, S. R., Braasch, J. L. G., Wiley, J., Graesser, A. C., & Brodowinska, K. M. (2011a). Comprehending and learning from Internet sources: Processing patterns of better and poorer learners (submitted).

  • Goldman, S. R., Lawless, K. A., Gomez, K. W., Braasch, J. L. G., McLeod, S., & Manning, F. (2010). Literacy in the digital world: Comprehending and learning from multiple sources. In M. G. McKeown & L. Kucan (Eds.), Bringing reading research to life (pp. 257–284). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, S. R., Ozuru, Y., Braasch, J. L. G., Manning, F. H., Lawless, K. A., Gomez, K. W., et al. (2011b). Literacies for learning: A multiple source comprehension illustration. In N. L. Stein & S. W. Raudenbush (Eds.), Developmental cognitive science goes to school (pp. 30–44). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, E., & Wineburg, S. (2012). Between veritas and communitas: Epistemic switching in the reading of academic and sacred history. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 84–129.

  • Gough, P. B., Hoover, W. A., & Peterson, C. L. (1996). Some observations on a simple view of reading. In C. Cornoldi & J. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties: Processes and intervention (pp. 1–13). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J. T. (Ed.). (2008). Engaging adolescents in reading. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J. T., Hoa, A. L. W., Wigfield, A., Tonks, S. M., Humenick, N. M., & Littles, E. (2007a). Reading motivation and reading comprehension growth in the later elementary years. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 282–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J. T., McRae, A., & Klauda, S. W. (2007b). Contributions of concept-oriented reading instruction to knowledge about interventions for motivations in reading. Educational Psychologist, 42, 237–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J. T., Taboada, A., & Coddington, C. S. (2007c). Engagement practices for strategy learning in Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction. In D. S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies (pp. 241–266). New York: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 403–422). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Barbosa, P., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., Davis, M. H., et al. (2004). Increasing reading comprehension and engagement through concept-oriented reading instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 403–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Metsala, J. L., & Cox, K. E. (1999). Motivational and cognitive predictors of text comprehension and reading amount. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 231–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & You, W. (2012). Instructional contexts for engagement and achievement in reading. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 601–634). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hagen, Å. M., Braasch, J. L. G., & Bråten, I. (2011). Relationships between spontaneous note-taking, self-reported strategies, and comprehension when reading multiple texts in different task conditions (submitted).

  • Hidi, S. (2001). Interest, reading, and learning: Theoretical and practical considerations. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 191–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, C. (1995). Word Recognition Index (WRI) as a quick screening marker of dyslexia. The Irish Journal of Psychology, 16, 260–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krapp, A. (1999). Interest, motivation, and learning: An educational-psychological perspective. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 23–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., & O’Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lervåg, A., & Bråten, I. (2002). Effects of memory load on word recognition: Are there dual-routers in Norway? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 15, 233–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Logan, S., Medford, E., & Hughes, N. (2011). The importance of intrinsic motivation for high and low ability readers’ reading comprehension performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 124–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Möller, J., & Schiefele, U. (2011). The motivational foundation of reading comprehension (submitted).

  • Nokes, J. D., Dole, J. A., & Hacker, D. J. (2007). Teaching high school students to use heuristics while reading historical texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 492–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research. (2006). Læreplan for grunnskolen og videregående skole [Curriculum for elementary and secondary school]. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onatsu-Arvilommi, T., & Nurmi, J. (2000). The role of task-avoidant and task-focused behavior in the development of reading and mathematical skills during the first school year: A cross-lagged longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 478–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, Y. (2011). How motivational constructs interact to predict elementary students’ reading performance: Examples from attitudes and self-concept in reading. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 347–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patrick, H., Ryan, A. M., & Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The differential impact of extrinsic and mastery goal orientations on males’ and females’ self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 11, 153–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., & Harris, K. R. (2006). Cognitive strategies instruction: From basic research to classroom instruction. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 265–286). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouet, J. F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to Web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouet, J. F., & Britt, M. A. (2011). Relevance processes in multiple documents comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 19–52). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rukavina, I., & Daneman, M. (1996). Integration and its effect on acquiring knowledge about competing scientific theories from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 272–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmerón, L., Gil, L., Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2010). Comprehension effects of signalling relationships between documents in search engines. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 419–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelstuen, M. S., & Bråten, I. (2005). Decoding, knowledge, and strategies in comprehension of expository text. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 46, 107–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiefele, U. (1998). Individual interest and learning: What we know and what we don’t know. In L. Hoffman, A. Krapp, K. Renninger, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Interest and learning: Proceedings of the Seeon conference on interest and gender (pp. 91–104). Kiel, Germany: IPN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiefele, U. (1999). Interest and learning from text. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 257–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2005). Competence perceptions and academic functioning. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 85–104). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Developing self-efficacious readers and writers: The role of social and self-regulatory processes. In J. T. Guthrie & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction (pp. 34–50). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich, K. E. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations and new frontiers. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich, K. E., Cunningham, A. E., & Feeman, D. J. (1984). Intelligence, cognitive skills, and early reading progress. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 278–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strømsø, H. I., & Bråten, I. (2009). Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and multiple-text comprehension among upper secondary students. Educational Psychology, 29, 425–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strømsø, H. I., Hagtvet, B. E., Lyster, S. A. H., & Rygvold, A. L. (1997). Lese- og skriveprøver for studenter på høyskole- og universitetsnivå [Reading and spelling tests for students in higher education]. Oslo: University of Oslo: Department of Special Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taboada, A., Tonks, S. M., Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (2009). Effects of motivational and cognitive variables on reading comprehension. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22, 85–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, A., & Nicholson, T. (1997). Flashcards revisited: Training poor readers to read words faster improves their comprehension of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 276–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VanSledright, B. A. (2002). Fifth graders investigating history in the classroom: Results from a researcher – practitioner design experiment. Elementary School Journal, 103, 131–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vellutino, F. R. (2003). Individual differences as sources of variability in reading comprehension in elementary school children. In A. P. Sweet & C. E. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 51–81). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, T., Salmerón, L., Cerdán, R., Gilabert, R., Gil, L., et al. (2011). Recording online processes in task-oriented reading with Read&Answer. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 179–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vinje, F. E. (1982). Journalistspråket [The journalist language]. Fredrikstad, Norway: Institute for Journalism.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wade, S. E., Trathen, W., & Schraw, G. (1990). An analysis of spontaneous study strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 25, 147–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J. H.-Y., & Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Modeling the effects of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, amount of reading, and past reading achievement on text comprehension between U.S. and Chinese students. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 162–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A. (1997). Reading motivation: A domain-specific approach to motivation. Educational Psychologist, 32, 59–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy—value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Relations of children’s motivation for reading to the amount and breadth of their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 420–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, J., & Voss, J. F. (1999). Constructing arguments from multiple sources: Tasks that promote understanding and not just memory for text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 301–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wineburg, 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, M. B. W., & Goldman, S. R. (2005). Relations between adolescents’ text processing and reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 23, 467–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt, D., Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P. B., Stein, S., Evans, P., & Brown, R. (1993). Comprehension strategies, worth and credibility monitoring, and evaluations: Cold and hot cognition when experts read professional articles that are important to them. Learning and Individual Differences, 5, 49–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Research, University of Oslo, Blindern, P.O. Box 1092, 0317, Oslo, Norway

    Ivar Bråten, Leila E. Ferguson, Øistein Anmarkrud & Helge I. Strømsø

Authors
  1. Ivar Bråten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Leila E. Ferguson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Øistein Anmarkrud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Helge I. Strømsø
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ivar Bråten.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Sample items for the topic knowledge measure

  1. 1.

    Ultraviolet (UV) radiation is …

    1. *a.

      electromagnetic radiation with an energy level higher than visible light.

    2. b.

      radiation from the colours of the rainbow.

    3. c.

      sound waves with a frequency higher than 20,000 Hz.

    4. d.

      radioactive radiation from materials in the atmosphere.

  2. 11.

    Vitamin D is only produced in the body when …

    1. a.

      we exercise.

    2. b.

      the body is exposed to microwave radiation.

    3. *c.

      when skin cells are radiated with ultraviolet radiation.

    4. d.

      we sleep.

  3. 19.

    You can protect yourself against skin cancer by …

    1. a.

      only staying outdoor when the UV-index is high.

    2. *b.

      using sun cream even when it’s cloudy

    3. c.

      getting enough vitamin C.

    4. d.

      exercising regularly.

Appendix 2: Items used in motivation scales

Science reading self-efficacy

  • It is easy for me to understand the content of a natural science book.

  • I will probably have problems understanding much of what’s in the natural science textbooks this school year (reversed).

  • I know that I will receive good grades in natural science this school year because I understand what I read in this subject so well.

  • I am not particularly good at understanding the natural science texts that I read (reversed).

  • I understand what I read in natural science well.

  • It is not always easy to understand the natural science texts that I read (reversed)

  • Most of the others in my class are probably better than me at understanding what they read in natural science (reversed).

  • I will not have problems understanding even the most difficult natural science texts this school year.

  • I easily lose interest when natural science texts are difficult to understand (reversed).

Science reading task value

  • Even though it can be difficult to understand the content of the natural science textbooks, I think it is important to understand it.

  • I really have no use for understanding what I read in natural science (reversed).

  • I think it is always important to understand what I read in natural science.

  • Good reading comprehension is useful in natural science.

  • I really like to understand the texts that I read in natural science.

  • Compared to other things that I do at school and in my free time, understanding natural science texts is not so important for me (reversed).

  • Good comprehension of natural science texts is useful to get a good job.

  • To understand a natural science text is not so important that I work extra on a difficult text (reversed).

  • I don’t think it matters if I don’t understand what I read in natural science (reversed).

  • It is particularly fun to read natural science texts when I understand them well.

  • I have no use for understanding what I read in natural science (reversed).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bråten, I., Ferguson, L.E., Anmarkrud, Ø. et al. Prediction of learning and comprehension when adolescents read multiple texts: the roles of word-level processing, strategic approach, and reading motivation. Read Writ 26, 321–348 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-012-9371-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-012-9371-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation