Metacognition and Learning

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 235–260

Internet-specific epistemic beliefs and self-regulated learning in online academic information searching

Article
  • 966 Downloads

Abstract

Epistemic beliefs have been considered as important components of the self-regulatory model; however, their relationships with self-regulated learning processes in the Internet context need further research. The main purpose of this study was to examine the relationships between Internet-specific epistemic belief dimensions and self-regulated learning activities while using the Internet for academic information searching. A total of 758 university students were sampled in this study. Through factor analyses, four dimensions of Internet-specific epistemic beliefs were identified, labeled as certainty of Internet-based knowledge, simplicity of Internet-based knowledge, source of Internet-based knowledge, and justification for Internet-based knowing. Factor analyses also revealed two dimensions of self-regulated learning while using the Internet for academic searching, namely preparatory self-regulated learning (i.e., task definition as well as goal setting and planning) and enactment self-regulated learning (i.e., controlling, monitoring, and reflecting). The results of the structural relationship analysis indicated that the preparatory phase of self-regulated learning positively correlated with Internet-specific epistemic beliefs relating to justification for Internet-based knowing, and was also negatively associated with two other dimensions of Internet-specific epistemic beliefs regarding simplicity of Internet-based knowledge and source of Internet-based knowledge. In addition, preparatory self-regulated learning mediated the relationships between these three dimensions of Internet-specific epistemic beliefs and the enactment phase of self-regulated learning.

Keywords

Epistemic beliefs Self-regulatory model Internet-based knowledge Information searching 

References

  1. Alexander, P. A. (1995). Superimposing a situation-specific and domain-specific perspective on an account of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 30(4), 189–193. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3004_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander, P. A., Dinsmore, D. L., Parkinson, M. M., & Winters, F. I. (2011). Self-regulated learning in academic domains. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 393–407). NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Azevedo, R. (2005). Using hypermedia as a metacognitive tool for enhancing student learning? The role of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 199–209. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4004_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Azevedo, R. (2009). Theoretical, conceptual, methodological, and instructional issues in research on metacognition and self-regulated learning: a discussion. Metacognition and Learning, 4(1), 87–95. doi:10.1007/s11409-009-9035-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Azevedo, R., Moos, D. C., Johnson, A. M., & Chauncey, A. D. (2010). Measuring cognitive and metacognitive regulatory processes during hypermedia learning: issues and challenges. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 210–223. doi:10.1080/00461520.2010.515934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94. doi:10.1007/BF02723327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bandalos, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2010). Factor analysis: Exploratory and confirmatory. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), The reviewer's guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences (pp. 93–114). NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Biddix, J. P., Chung, C. J., & Park, H. W. (2011). The Internet and higher education convenience or credibility? A study of college student online research behaviors. The Internet and Higher Education, 14(3), 175–182. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.01.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boekaerts, M. (1995). Self-regulated learning: bridging the gap between metacognitive and metamotivation theories. Educational Psychologist, 30(4), 195–200. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3004_4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. Bråten, I. (2008). Personal epistemology, understanding of multiple texts, and learning within Internet technologies. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge and beliefs: Epistemological studies across diverse cultures (pp. 351–376). NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2005). The relationship between epistemological beliefs, implicit theories of intelligence, and self-regulated learning among Norwegian postsecondary students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(4), 539–565. doi:10.1348/000709905X25067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2006). Epistemological beliefs, interest, and gender as predictors of Internet-based learning activities. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(6), 1027–1042. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.03.026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Samuelstuen, M. S. (2005). The relationship between Internet-specific epistemological beliefs and learning within Internet technologies. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 33(2), 141–171. doi:10.2190/E763-X0LN-6NMF-CB86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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(4), 814–840. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.02.001.
  16. Bromme, R., Pieschl, S., & Stahl, E. (2010). Epistemological beliefs are standards for adaptive learning: a functional theory about epistemological beliefs and metacognition. Metacognition and Learning, 5(1), 7–26. doi:10.1007/s11409-009-9053-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Buehl, M. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2001). Beliefs about academic knowledge. Educational Psychology Review, 13(4), 385–418. doi:10.1023/A:1011917914756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Buehl, M. M., Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (2002). Beliefs about schooled knowledge: domain specific or domain general? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(3), 415–449. doi:10.1006/ceps.2001.1103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cheng, K. H., Liang, J. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). University students’ online academic help seeking: the role of self-regulation and information commitments. The Internet and Higher Education, 16, 70–77. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.02.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cleary, T. J., Callan, G. L., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2012). Assessing self-regulation as a cyclical, context-specific phenomenon: overview and analysis of SRL microanalytic protocols. Education Research International, 2012, 1–19. doi:10.1155/2012/428639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Deng, F., Chen, D. T., Tsai, C. C., & Chai, C. S. (2011). Students’ views of the nature of science: a critical review of research. Science Education, 95(6), 961–999. doi:10.1002/sce.20460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2001). On the substance of a sophisticated epistemology. Science Education, 85(5), 554–567. doi:10.1002/sce.1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Greene, J. A., & Azevedo, R. (2010). The measurement of learners’ self-regulated cognitive and metacognitive processes while using computer-based learning environments. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 203–209. doi:10.1080/00461520.2010.515935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Greene, J. A., Muis, K. R., & Pieschl, S. (2010). The role of epistemic beliefs in students’ self-regulated learning with computer-based learning environments: conceptual and methodological issues. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 245–257. doi:10.1080/00461520.2010.515932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hadwin, A. F., Winne, P. H., Stockley, D. B., Nesbit, J. C., & Woszczyna, C. (2001). Context moderates students’ self-reports about how they study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 477–487. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.93.3.477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  27. Hartley, K., & Bendixen, L. D. (2001). Educational research in the internet age: examining the role of individual characteristics. Educational Researcher, 30(9), 22–26. doi:10.3102/0013189X030009022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hofer, B. K. (1994). Epistemological beliefs and first-year college students: Motivation and cognition in different instructional contexts. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  29. Hofer, B. K. (2000). Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 378–405. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hofer, B. K. (2001). Personal epistemology research: implications for learning and teaching. Educational Psychology Review, 13(4), 353–383. doi:10.1023/A:1011965830686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hofer, B. K. (2004). Epistemological understanding as a metacognitive process: thinking aloud during online searching. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 43–55. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3901_5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 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(1), 88–140. doi:10.3102/00346543067001088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hofer, B. K., & Sinatra, G. M. (2010). Epistemology, metacognition, and self-regulation: musings on an emerging field. Metacognition and Learning, 5(1), 113–120. doi:10.1007/s11409-009-9051-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kammerer, Y., & Gerjets, P. (2012). Effects of search interface and Internet-specific epistemic beliefs on source evaluations during Web search for medical information: an eye-tracking study. Behaviour & Information Technology, 31(1), 83–97. doi:10.1080/0144929X.2011.599040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lee, S. W. Y., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). Students’ perception of collaboration, self-regulated learning, and information seeking in the context of Internet-based learning and traditional learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 905–914. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lin, C. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2008). Exploring the structural relationships between high school students’ scientific epistemological views and their utilization of information commitments toward online science information. International Journal of Science Education, 30(15), 2001–2022. doi:10.1080/09500690701613733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 83–104. doi:10.1037//1082-989X.7.1.83.Google Scholar
  38. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58(1), 593–614. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085542.
  39. Mason, L., & Boldrin, A. (2008). Epistemic metacognition in the context of information searching on the Web. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge and beliefs: Epistemological studies across diverse cultures (pp. 377–404). NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mason, L., Boldrin, A., & Ariasi, N. (2010a). Epistemic metacognition in context: evaluating and learning online information. Metacognition and Learning, 5(1), 67–90. doi:10.1007/s11409-009-9048-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mason, L., Boldrin, A., & Ariasi, N. (2010b). Searching the Web to learn about a controversial topic: are students epistemically active? Instructional Science, 38(6), 607–633. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9089-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mason, L., Ariasi, N., & Boldrin, A. (2011). Epistemic beliefs in action: spontaneous reflections about knowledge and knowing during online information searching and their influence on learning. Learning and Instruction, 21(1), 137–151. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.01.001.
  43. Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., & Zwarun, L. (2003). College student Web use, perceptions of information credibility, and verification behavior. Computers & Education, 41(3), 271–290. doi:10.1016/S0360-1315(03)00049-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Muis, K. R. (2007). The role of epistemic beliefs in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 173–190. doi:10.1080/00461520701416306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Muis, K. R. (2008). Epistemic profiles and self-regulated learning: examining relations in the context of mathematics problem solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(2), 177–208. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.10.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Muis, K. R., & Franco, G. M. (2009). Epistemic beliefs: setting the standards for self-regulated learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(4), 306–318. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.06.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Muis, K. R., & Franco, G. M. (2010). Epistemic profiles and metacognition: support for the consistency hypothesis. Metacognition and Learning, 5(1), 27–45. doi:10.1007/s11409-009-9041-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Muis, K. R., Bendixen, L. D., & Haerle, F. C. (2006). Domain-generality and domain-specificity in personal epistemology research: philosophical and empirical reflections in the development of a theoretical framework. Educational Psychology Review, 18(1), 3–54. doi:10.1007/s10648-006-9003-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Muis, K. R., Kendeou, P., & Franco, G. M. (2011). Consistent results with the consistency hypothesis? The effects of epistemic beliefs on metacognitive processing. Metacognition and Learning, 6(1), 45–63. doi:10.1007/s11409-010-9066-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Paulhus, D. L., & Vazire, S. (2007). The self-report method. In R. W. Robins, R. C. Fraley, & R. F. Krueger (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology (pp. 224–239). NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  51. Pieschl, S., Stahl, E., & Bromme, R. (2008). Epistemological beliefs and self-regulated learning with hypertext. Metacognition and Learning, 3(1), 17–37. doi:10.1007/s11409-007-9008-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451–502). CA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Future challenges and directions for theory and research on personal epistemology. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 389–414). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  54. Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385–407. doi:10.1007/s10648-004-0006-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pintrich, P. R., Wolters, C. A., & Baxter, G. P. (2000). Assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning. In G. Schraw & J. C. Impara (Eds.), Issues in the measurement of metacognition (pp. 43–97). NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.Google Scholar
  56. Raines-Eudy, R. (2000). Using structural equation modeling to test for differential reliability and validity: an empirical demonstration. Structural Equation Modeling, 7(1), 124–141. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0701_07.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Richter, T., & Schmid, S. (2010). Epistemological beliefs and epistemic strategies in self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 5(1), 47–65. doi:10.1007/s11409-009-9038-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 498–504. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.3.498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Schommer, M. (1993). Epistemological development and academic performance among secondary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 406–411. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.85.3.406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Strømsø, H. I., & Bråten, I. (2010). The role of personal epistemology in the self-regulation of internet-based learning. Metacognition and Learning, 5(1), 91–111. doi:10.1007/s11409-009-9043-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tsai, C. C. (2004). Beyond cognitive and metacognitive tools: the use of Internet as an “epistemological” tool for instruction. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5), 525–536. doi:10.1111/j.0007-1013.2004.00411.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Tsai, M. J. (2009). Online Information Searching Strategy Inventory (OISSI): a quick version and a complete version. Computers & Education, 53(2), 473–483. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.03.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tsai, C. C., & Chuang, S. C. (2005). The correlation between epistemological beliefs and preferences toward Internet-based learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(1), 97–100. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2004.00442.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Tsai, M. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2003). Information searching strategies in Web-based science learning: the role of internet self-efficacy. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 40(1), 43–50. doi:10.1080/1355800032000038822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tsai, C. C., Ho, H. N. J., Liang, J. C., & Lin, H. M. (2011a). Scientific epistemic beliefs, conceptions of learning science and self-efficacy of learning science among high school students. Learning and Instruction, 21(6), 757–769. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.05.002.Google Scholar
  66. Tsai, P. S., Tsai, C. C., & Hwang, G. J. (2011b). The correlates of Taiwan teachers’ epistemological beliefs concerning Internet environments, online search strategies, and search outcomes. The Internet and Higher Education, 14(1), 54–63. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.03.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Tu, Y. W., Shih, M., & Tsai, C. C. (2008). Eighth graders’ web searching strategies and outcomes: the role of task types, web experiences and epistemological beliefs. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1142–1153. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.11.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Winne, P. H. (1995). Inherent details in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 30(4), 173–187. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3004_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Winne, P. H. (2010). Improving measurements of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 267–276. doi:10.1080/00461520.2010.517150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277–304). NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  71. Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 531–566). CA: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Zhu, Y. Q., Chen, L. Y., Chen, H. G., & Chern, C. C. (2011). How does Internet information seeking help academic performance? The moderating and mediating roles of academic self-efficacy. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2476–2484. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: an overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3–17. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2501_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). CA: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2004). Self-regulating intellectual processes and outcome: A social cognitive perspective. In D. Y. Dai & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Motivation, emotion and cognition: Integrative perspectives on intellectual functioning and development (pp. 323–349). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yen-Lin Chiu
    • 1
  • Jyh-Chong Liang
    • 2
  • Chin-Chung Tsai
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate Institute of Digital Learning and EducationNational Taiwan University of Science and TechnologyTaipei 106Taiwan
  2. 2.Graduate Institute of Applied Science and TechnologyNational Taiwan University of Science and TechnologyTaipei 106Taiwan

Personalised recommendations