Advertisement

Epistemic Metacognition in the Context of Information Searching on the Web

  • Lucia Mason
  • Angela Boldrin
Chapter

After Perry’s (1969) pioneering work, research on the psychology of epistemic beliefs, that is, personal beliefs about knowledge and knowing (Hofer & Pintrich, 2002), has flourished since the beginning of the 1990s. At least three major lines of investigation can be identified in the literature, the first of which deals with the development of epistemic thinking. According to developmental psychologists, it can be conceived as a cognitive structure comprising coherent and integrated representations, which characterize a level or stage of cognitive development. This cognitive structure has been described in relation to the ways of knowing (Belenky et al., 1986), epistemological reflection (Baxter Magolda, 1992), reflective judgment (King & Kitchener, 1994), relativistic thinking (Chandler et al., 1990), and argumentative reasoning (Kuhn, 1991).

Keywords

Conceptual Change Information Searching Online Information Knowledge Claim Epistemological Belief 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alexander, J. E., & Tate, M. A. (1999). Web wisdom: How to evaluate and create information quality on the Web. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, P. A., & Sinatra, G. M. (2007). First steps: Scholars’ promising movements into a nascent field of inquiry. In S. Vosniadou, A. Baltas, & X. Vamvakoussi (Eds.), Reframing the conceptual change approach in learning and instruction. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  3. Baxter Magolda, M. B. (1992). Knowing and reasoning in college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  4. Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women’ ways of knowing: The development of self, voice and mind. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  5. Bell, P., & Linn, M. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing fo learning on the Web in KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 797–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bell, P., & Linn, M. (2002). Beliefs about science: How does science instruction contribute? In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 321–346). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  7. Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2006). Epistemological beliefs, interest, and gender as predictors of Internet-based learning activities. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 1027–1042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 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, 141–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brem, S. K., Russell, J., & Weems, L. (2001). Science on the Web: Student evaluations of scientific arguments. Discourse Processes, 32, 191–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown, A. L. (1978). Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem of metacognition. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 77–165). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  11. Brunner, C. B., & Tally, W. (1999). The new media literacy handbook: An educator’s guide to bringing new media into the classroom. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  12. Buehl, M. M., Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (2002). Beliefs about schooled knowledge: Domain specific or domain general? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 415–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chandler, M., Boyes, M., & Ball, L. (1990). Relativism and stations of epistemic doubt. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 50, 370–395.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chi, M. T. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analysis of verbal data: A practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 271–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Clark, D. B., & Slotta, J. D. (2000). Evaluating media-enhancement and source authority on the Internet: The knowledge integration evaluation. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 859–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Coiro, J. (2003). Reading comprehension on the Internet: Expanding our understanding ofreading comprehension to encompass new literacies. Reading Online (www.readingonline.org/electronic/rt/2–03).
  17. diSessa, A. A., Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2003). J’s epistemological stance and strategies. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 237–290). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  18. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Buchingham: Open University.Google Scholar
  19. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal report as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  20. Feldman, A., Konond, C., & Coulter, B. (2000). Network science a decade later: The Internet and classroom learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 34, 906–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Greenfield, P., & Yan, Z. (2006). Children, adolescents, and the Internet: A new field of inquirt in developmental psychology. Developmental Psychology, 42, 391–394.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hartley, K., & Bendixen, L. D. (2001). Educational research in the Internet age: Examining the role of individual characteristics. Educational Researcher, 30, 22–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hess, B. (1999). Graduate student cognition during information retrieval using the World Wide Web: A pilot study. Computers & Education, 33, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hirsch, S. (1999). Children’s relevance criteria and information seeking on electronic resources. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50, 1265–1283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hofer, B. (2000). Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 378–405.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hofer, B. (2004). Epistemological understanding as a metacognitive process: Thinking aloud during online searching. Educational Psychologist, 39, 43–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hofer, B. (2006). Beliefs about knowledge and knowing: Integrating domain specificity and domain generality: A response to Muis, Bendixen, and Haerle. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 67–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hofer, B. K. (2000). Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 378–405. 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.Google Scholar
  30. Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (Eds.) (2002). Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  31. International Reading Association (2001). Integrating literacy and technology in the curriculum: A position statement. Online document: http://www.reading.org/downloads/positions/ps1048_technology.pdf.
  32. Jacobson, M. J., & Spiro, R. J. (1995). Hypertext learning environments, cognitive flexibility, and the transfer of complex knowledge: An empirical investigation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12, 301–333.Google Scholar
  33. Kardash, C. M., & Scholes, R. J. (1996). Effects of preexisting beliefs, epistemological beliefs, and need for cognition on interpretation of controversial issues. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 260–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. King, P. A., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgement. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  35. Kitchener, K. S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition. Human Development, 26, 222–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kruglanski, A. W. (1989). Lay epistemics and human knowledge: Cognitive and motivational bases. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  37. Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educational Researcher, 28, 16–26.Google Scholar
  39. Kuhn, D. (2000). Theory of mind, metacognition, and reasoning: A life-span perspective. In P. Mitchell & K. J. Riggs (Eds.), Children’s reasoning and the mind (pp. 301–326). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  40. Kuhn, D., & Weinstock, M. (2002). What is epistemological thinking and why does it matter? In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology. The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 121–144). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  41. Kuhn, D., Cheney, R., & Weinstock, M. (2000). The development of epistemological understanding. Cognitive Development, 15, 309–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Leach, J., & Lewis, J. (2002). The role of students’ epistemological knowledge in the process of conceptual change in science. In M. Limón & L. Mason (Eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change (pp. 201–216). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Leach, J., Millar, R., Ryder, J., & M.-G. Séré (2000). Epistemological understanding in science learning: The consistency of representations across contexts. Learning and Instruction, 10, 497–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Leu, D. J. Jr. (2002). Literacy and technology: Deictic consequences for literacy education in an information age. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 743–770). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  45. Linn, M., Bell, P., & Hsi, S. (1998). Using the Internet to enhance student understanding of science: The Knowledge Integration Environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 6, 4–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Louca, L., Elby, A., Hammer, D., & Kagey, T. (2004). Epistemological resources: Applying a new epistemological framework to science instruction. Educational Psychologist, 39, 57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mason, L. (2002). Developing epistemological thinking to foster conceptual changes in different domains. In M. Limón & L. Mason (Eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change. Issues in theory and practice (pp. 301–335). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mason, L. (2003). Personal epistemologies and intentional conceptual change. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 199–236). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  49. Mason, L., & Boscolo, P. (2004). Role of epistemological understanding and interest in interpreting a controversy and in topic-specific belief change, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 103–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mason, L., & Gava, M. (2007). Effects of epistemological beliefs and learning text structure on conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou, A. Baltas, & X. Vamvakoussi (Eds.), Reframing the Conceptual Change Approach in Learning and Instruction (pp. 165–197). Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  51. Mayer, R. E. (Ed.) (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Muis, K. R. (2004). Personal epistemology and mathematics: A critical review and synthesis of research. Review of Educational Research, 9, 47–58.Google Scholar
  53. 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, 3–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nuckles, & Bromme, R. (2002). Internet experts’ planning of explanations for laypersons: A web experimental approach in the Internet domain. Experimental Psychology, 49, 292–304.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Perry, W. G. Jr. (1969). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York: Holt (Rinehart and Winston).Google Scholar
  56. 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. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Meausurements.Google Scholar
  57. Qian, G., & Alvermann, D. (1995). Role of epistemological beliefs and learned helplessness in secondary school students’ learning science concepts from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 282–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rothenberg, D. (1997). How the web destroys the quality of students’ research papers. Chronicle of Higher Education, 49, A44.Google Scholar
  59. Ryan, M. P. (1984). Monitoring text comprehension: Individual differences in epistemological standards. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 248–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schacter, J., Chung, G., & Dorr, A. (1998). Children’s Internet searching on complex problems: Performance and process analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49, 840–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 498–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Schommer, M., Crouse, A., & Rhodes, N. (1992). Epistemological beliefs and mathematical text comprehension: Believing it is simple does not make it so. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 435–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Schraw, G., Dunkle, M. E., & Bendixen, L. D. (1995). Cognitive processes in well-defined and ill-defined problem solving. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 523–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sinatra, G. M., Southerland, S. A., McConaughy, F., & Demastes, J. (2003). Intentions and beliefs in students’ understanding and acceptance of biological evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 510–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Stanovich, K. E. (1999). Who is rational? Studies in individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Sweller, J. (2005). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 19–30). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Tsai, C. C. (2004). Beyond cognitive and metacognitive tools: The use of the Internet as an epistemological tool for instruction. British Journal of Educational Technological, 35, 525–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Windschitl, M., & Andre, T. (1998). Using computer simulations to enhance conceptual change: The roles of constructivist instruction and student epistemological beliefs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 145–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Zhang, S., & Duke, N. K. (2005). Strategies of Internet reading with different reading purposes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lucia Mason
    • 1
  • Angela Boldrin
    • 1
  1. 1.University of PaduaPadovaItaly

Personalised recommendations