Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Theory of Knowledge Revision: the Development of the KReC Framework

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Educational Psychology Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, I discuss the inspiration, development, and further refinement of the Knowledge Revision Components framework (KReC; Kendeou & O’Brien, 2014). In KReC, we theorize about the conditions that facilitate knowledge revision during reading, and thus successful learning in the presence of prior, often incorrect knowledge. I discuss how the inspiration and need for the framework arose, and how a systematic set of experimental studies and a shift in paradigm led to its initial development and further refinement. I also outline several virtues and contributions of this framework to the extant literature. I conclude with future directions for further development and applications of the framework in the current information ecosystem.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aguilar, S. J., Polikoff, M. S., & Sinatra, G. M. (2019). Refutation texts: A new approach to changing public misconceptions about education policy. Educational Researcher, 48(5), 263–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albrecht, J. E., & O’Brien, E. J. (1993). Updating a situation model: Maintaining both local and global coherence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19(5), 1061–1070.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amazeen, M. A., & Krishna, A. (2023). Refuting misinformation: Examining theoretical underpinnings of refutational interventions. Current Opinion in Psychology, 101774.

  • Ariasi, N., Hyönä, J., Kaakinen, J. K., & Mason, L. (2017). An eye-movement analysis of the refutation effect in reading science text. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(3), 202–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ariasi, N., & Mason, L. (2011). Uncovering the effect of text structure in learning from a science text: An eye-tracking study. Instructional Science, 39(5), 581–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn?: A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 612–637.

  • Beker, K., Kim, J., Van Boekel, M., van den Broek, P., & Kendeou, P. (2019). Refutation texts enhance spontaneous transfer of knowledge. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 56, 67–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohn-Gettler, C. M. (2019). Getting a grip: The PET framework for studying how reader emotions influence comprehension. Discourse Processes, 56(5-6), 386–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Britt, M. A., & Rouet, J. (2020). Multiple document comprehension. In L. F. Zhang (Ed.), The Oxford encyclopedia of educational psychology. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butterfuss, R. (2020). Revising misconceptions using multiple documents. Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/216409.

  • Butterfuss, R., & Kendeou, P. (2018). The role of executive functions in reading comprehension. Educational Psychology Review, 30, 801–826.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butterfuss, R., & Kendeou, P. (2021). KReC-MD: Knowledge revision with multiple documents. Educational Psychology Review, 33, 1475–1497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H. (2008). Three types of conceptual change: Belief revision, mental model transformation, and categorical shift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 61–82). Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H. (2013). Two kinds and four sub-types of misconceived knowledge, ways to change it and the learning outcomes. In International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change ((2nd edition). ed., pp. 49–70). Routledge Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63(1), 1–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chinn, C. A., Buckland, L. A., & Samarapungavan, A. L. A. (2011). Expanding the dimensions of epistemic cognition: Arguments from philosophy and psychology. Educational Psychologist, 46(3), 141–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danielson, R. W., Sinatra, G. M., & Kendeou, P. (2016). Augmenting the refutation text effect with analogies and graphics. Discourse Processes, 53(5-6), 392–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeCuir-Gunby, J. T., & Schutz, P. A. (2024). The evolution of race-focused and race-reimaged approaches in educational psychology: Future directions for the field. Educational Psychology Review, 36, 30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09873-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diakidoy, I. N., & Kendeou, P. (2001). Facilitating conceptual change in astronomy: A comparison of the effectiveness of two instructional approaches. Learning and Instruction, 11, 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diakidoy, I. N., Kendeou, P., & Ioannides, C. (2003). Reading about energy: Τhe effects of text structure in science learning and conceptual change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 335–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • diSessa, A. A. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. In G. Foreman & P. Pufall (Eds.), Constructivism in the computer age (pp. 49–70). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • diSessa, A. A. (2013). A bird’s eye view of “pieces” vs. “coherence” controversy. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), Handbook of conceptual change research (2nd ed., pp. 31–48). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dole, J. A., & Sinatra, G. M. (1994). Social psychology research on beliefs and attitudes: Implications for research on learning from text. In R. Garner & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Beliefs about text and instruction with text (pp. 245–264). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, A. M., Zhan, J., & Rapp, D. N. (2018). Supporting historical understandings with refutation texts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 54, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ecker, U., Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Fazio, L., Brashier, N., Kendeou, P., Vraga, E., & Amazeen, M. (2022). Drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1, 13–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fleury, V. P., Trevors, G., & Kendeou, P. (2019). Public perception of autism treatments: The role of credibility and evidence. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 49, 1876–1886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franco, G., Muis, K., Kendeou, P., Ranellucci, J., Sampasivam, L., & Wang, X. (2012). Examining the influences of epistemic beliefs and knowledge representations on cognitive processing and conceptual change when learning physics. Learning and Instruction, 22, 62–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillund, G., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1984). A retrieval model for both recognition and recall. Psychological Review, 91(1), 1–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. A. (2022). What can educational psychology learn from, and contribute to, scholarship on theory development? Educational Psychology Review, 34, 3011–3035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. A., Sandoval, W. A., & Bräten, I. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of epistemic cognition. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzzetti, B. J., Snyder, T. E., Glass, G. V., & Gamas, W. S. (1993). Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly, 117–159.

  • Harsch, R., & Kendeou, P. (2023). Learning from refutation texts about scientific topics with analogical and causal explanations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 73, 102172.

  • Hewson, P. W., & Hewson, M. G. (1984). The role of conceptual conflict in conceptual change and the design of science instruction. Instructional Science, 13, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hintzman, D. L. (1986). ‘Schema abstraction’ in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review, 93(4), 411–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hynd, C. R., & Alvermann, D. E. (1986). The role of refutation text in overcoming difficulty with science concepts. Journal of Reading, 29, 440–446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, V., Butterfuss, R., Kim, J., Orcutt, E., Harsch, R., & Kendeou, P. (2022). The ‘Fauci Effect’: Reducing COVID-19 misconceptions and vaccine hesitancy using an authentic multimodal intervention. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 70, np.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendeou, P., Braasch, J. L. G., & Bråten, I. (2016). Optimizing conditions for learning: Situating refutations in epistemic cognition. Journal of Experimental Education, 84, 245–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendeou, P., Butterfuss, R., Kim, J., & Van Boekel, M. (2019). Knowledge revision through the lenses of the three-pronged approach. Memory & Cognition, 47, 33–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendeou, P., & Johnson, V. (2024). The nature of misinformation in education. Current Opinion in Psychology, 55, 101734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2023.101734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendeou, P., Muis, K. R., & Fulton, S. (2011). Reader and text factors on reading comprehension processes. Journal of Research in Reading, 34, 365–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendeou, P., & O’Brien, E. J. (2014). The Knowledge Revision Components (KReC) framework: Processes and mechanisms. In D. N. Rapp & J. L. G. Braasch (Eds.), Processing inaccurate information: Theoretical and applied perspectives from cognitive science and the educational sciences (pp. 353–377). MIT Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kendeou, P., Smith, E. R., & O’Brien, E. J. (2013). Updating during reading comprehension: Why causality matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 39, 854–865.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendeou, P., & van den Broek, P. (2005). The effects of readers’ misconceptions on comprehension of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 235–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendeou, P., & van den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1567–1577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendeou, P., Walsh, E., Smith, E. R., & O’Brien, E. J. (2014). Knowledge revision processes in refutation texts. Discourse Processes, 51, 374–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J., & Kendeou, P. (2021). Knowledge transfer in the context of refutation texts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 67, 102–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lassonde, K., Kendeou, P., & O’Brien, E. J. (2016). Refutation texts: Overcoming psychology misconceptions that are resistant to change. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 2, 62–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Ecker, U. K. H., Albarracín, D., Amazeen, M. A., Kendeou, P., Lombardi, D., Newman, E. J., Pennycook, G., Porter, E., Rand, D. G., Rapp, D. N., Reifler, J., Roozenbeek, J., Schmid, P., Seifert, C. M., Sinatra, G. M., Swire-Thompson, et al. (2020). The Debunking Handbook 2020. Available at: https://sks.to/db2020. https://doi.org/10.17910/b7.1182

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Holford, D. L., Finn, A., Leask, J., Thomson, A., Lombardi, D., Al-Rawi, A. K., Amazeen, M. A., Anderson, E. C., Armaos, K. D., Betsch, C., Bruns, H. H. B., Ecker, U. K. H., Gavaruzzi, T., Hahn, U., Herzog, S., Juanchich, M., … Vraga, E. K (2021). The COVID-19 vaccine communication handbook. A practical guide for improving vaccine communication and fighting misinformation. Available at: https://sks.to/c19vax

  • López, F. (2022). Can educational psychology be harnessed to make changes for the greater good? Educational Psychologist, 57(2), 114–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magliano, J. P., & Graesser, A. C. (1991). A three-pronged method for studying inference generation in literary text. Poetics, 20, 193–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magliano, J. P., Trabasso, T., & Graesser, A. C. (1999). Strategic processing during comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 615–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, L., Borella, E., Diakidoy, I. A., Butterfuss, R., Kendeou, P., & Carretti, B. (2020). Learning from refutation and standard expository science texts: The contribution of inhibitory functions in relation to text type. Discourse Processes, 57, 921–939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCrudden, M. T., & Kendeou, P. (2014). Exploring the link between cognitive processes and learning from refutational text. Journal of Research in Reading, 37, 116–140.

  • Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muis, K. M., Kendeou, P., & Franco, G. M. (2011). Consistent results with the consistency hypothesis? the effects of epistemic beliefs on metacognitive processing. Metacognition and Learning, 6, 45–63.

  • Myers, J. L., & O'Brien, E. J. (1998). Accessing the discourse representation during reading. Discourse Processes, 26(2-3), 131–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, E. J., Cook, A. E., & Guéraud, S. (2010). Accessibility of outdated information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 979–991.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, E. J., & Myers, J. L. (1987). The role of causal connections in the retrieval of text. Memory & Cognition, 15, 419–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, E. J., & Myers, J. L. (1999). Text comprehension: A view from the bottom up. In S. R. Goldman, A. C. Graesser, & P. van den Broek (Eds.), Narrative comprehension, causality, and coherence: Essays in honor of Tom Trabasso (pp. 36–53). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, E. J., Rizzella, M. L., Albrecht, J. E., & Halleran, J. G. (1998). Updating a situation model: A memory-based text processing view. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24(5), 1200–1210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pereira, A., Harris, E., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2023). Identity concerns drive belief: The impact of partisan identity on the belief and dissemination of true and false news. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 26(1), 24–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perfetti, C. A., Rouet, J.-F., & Britt, M. A. (1999). Toward a theory of documents representation. In H. van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 99–122). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potvin, P. (2013). Proposition for improving the classical models of conceptual change based on neuroeducational evidence: Conceptual prevalence. Neuroeducation, 1, 16–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potvin, P., Masson, S., Lafortune, S., & Cyr, G. (2015). Persistence of the intuitive conception that heavier objects sink more: A reaction time study with different levels of interference. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13, 21–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapp, D. N., & Kendeou, P. (2007). Revising what readers know: Updating text representations during narrative comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 35, 2019–2032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapp, D. N., & Kendeou, P. (2009). Noticing and revising discrepancies as texts unfold. Discourse Processes, 46, 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapp D. N., & Mensink M. C. (2011). Focusing effects from online and offline reading tasks. In McCrudden M. T., Magliano J. P., Schraw G. (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 141–164). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

  • Ratcliff, R., & McKoon, G. (1988). A retrieval theory of priming in memory. Psychological Review, 95, 385–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rich, P. R., & Zaragoza, M. S. (2020). Correcting misinformation in news stories: An investigation of correction timing and correction durability. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 9(3), 310–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rizzella, M. L., & O'Brien, E. J. (2002). Retrieval of concepts in script-based texts and narratives: The influence of general world knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(4), 780–790.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scattarelli, J., & Kendeou, P. (2023, June). Automating debunking: Can chatbots correct misconceptions? Poster presentation at the 2023 Annual Meeting of the Society for Text and Discourse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, N. L., & Kucera, A. C. (2022). Refutation text facilitates learning: A meta-analysis of between-subjects experiments. Educational Psychology Review, 34(2), 957–987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shtulman, A., & Valcarcel, J. (2012). Scientific knowledge suppresses but does not supplant earlier intuitions. Cognition, 124(2), 209–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simchon, A., Edwards, M., & Lewandowsky, S. (2024). The persuasive effects of political microtargeting in the age of generative artificial intelligence. PNAS nexus, 3(2), pgae035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinatra, G., & Broughton, S. (2011). Bridging reading comprehension and conceptual change in science education: The promise of refutation text. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(4), 374–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sparks, J. R., & Rapp, D. N. (2011). Readers’ reliance on source credibility in the service of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(1), 230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tippett, C. D. (2010). Refutation text in science education: A review of two decades of research. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(6), 951–970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trabasso, T., & Suh, S. (1993). Understanding text: Achieving explanatory coherence through on-line inferences and mental operations in working memory. Discourse Processes, 16(1-2), 3–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trabasso, T., & van den Broek, P. (1985). Causal thinking and the representation of narrative events. Journal of Memory and Language, 24(5), 612–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trevors, G., & Kendeou, P. (2020). The effects of positive and negative emotional text content on knowledge revision. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 73(9), 1326–1339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trevors, G., Kendeou, P., & Butterfuss, R. (2017). Emotions in knowledge revision. Discourse Processes, 54(5-6), 406–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trevors, G. J. (2022). The roles of identity conflict, emotion, and threat in learning from refutation texts on vaccination and immigration. Discourse Processes, 59(1-2), 36–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trevors, G. J., Muis, K. R., Pekrun, R., Sinatra, G. M., & Winne, P. H. (2016). Identity and epistemic emotions during knowledge revision: A potential account for the backfire effect. Discourse Processes, 53(5-6), 339–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Boekel, M., Lassonde, K., O’Brien, E. J., & Kendeou, P. (2017). Source credibility and the processing of refutation texts. Memory & Cognition, 45, 168–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van den Broek, P., Bohn-Gettler, C., Kendeou, P., Carlson, S., & White, M. J. (2011). When a reader meets a text: The role of standards of coherence in reading comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 123–140). Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Broek, P., & Kendeou, P. (2008). Cognitive processes in comprehension of science texts: The role of co-activation in confronting misconceptions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 335–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van den Broek, P., Young, M., Tzeng, Y., & Linderholm, T. (1999). The landscape model of reading: Inferences and the on-line construction of a memory representation. In H. van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 71–98). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vosniadou, S. (Ed.). (2008). International handbook of research on conceptual change (1st ed.). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vosniadou, S. (Ed.). (2013). International handbook of research on conceptual change (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Will, K., Vlach, H., & Kendeou, P. (2019). The effects of refutation texts on generating explanations. Learning and Individual Differences, 69, 109–115.

  • Wilson, J. T., & Bauer, P. J. (2023). Generative processes and knowledge revision. Learning and Motivation, 84, 101936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zengilowski, A., Schuetze, B. A., Nash, B. L., & Schallert, D. L. (2021). A critical review of the refutation text literature: Methodological confounds, theoretical problems, and possible solutions. Educational Psychologist, 56(3), 175–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Edward J. O’Brien, Victoria Johnson, Marianna Pagkratidou, and Ali Fulsher for their feedback during the writing of this manuscript.

Funding

Writing of this manuscript was funded in part by the Guy Bond Chair in Reading and Distinguished McKnight Professorship to P. Kendeou from the University of Minnesota.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota, 56 East River Road, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA

    Panayiota Kendeou

Authors
  1. Panayiota Kendeou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Panayiota Kendeou.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kendeou, P. A Theory of Knowledge Revision: the Development of the KReC Framework. Educ Psychol Rev 36, 44 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09885-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09885-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation