Abstract
Advanced learning in ill-structured domains is frequently based on multiple documents that contain conflicting information and opposing perspectives on the same or related issues (such as multiple texts belonging to a scientific controversy). In such cases, cognitive flexibility can be defined as the ability to develop a justified point of view by adopting some arguments and rejecting others on rational grounds. I suggest that learners can achieve this goal only if they actively and strategically validate incoming text information against previously acquired knowledge and beliefs (epistemic validation, statement 1). Up to now, the cognitive processes underlying epistemic validation have not been addressed by the major theories in the fields of text comprehension and learning from text. I introduce a simple process model according to which epistemic validation rests on two types of cognitive processes, (automatic) epistemic monitoring and (strategic) epistemic elaboration (statement 2). Epistemic monitoring means that learners regularly and efficiently monitor incoming text information for internal consistency and plausibility. In many cases, learners tend to refute new information that conflicts with their prior knowledge or information acquired earlier. Alternatively, learners motivated and able to do so may engage in an effortful and strategic epistemic elaboration of arguments that are initially evaluated as implausible. Finally, I propose that learners’ epistemological beliefs serve as declarative metacognition that is crucial for engagement in epistemic elaboration. As such, epistemological beliefs determine whether learners achieve cognitive flexibility in learning with multiple texts (statement 3).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anderson, R. C. (1985). Role of the reader’s schema in comprehension, learning, and memory. In H. Singer & R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Anderson, C. A., Lepper, M. R., & Ross, L. (1980). Perseverance of social theories: The role of explanation in the persistence of discredited information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1037–1049.
Britt, M. A., & Angliskas, C. (2002). Improving students’ ability to identify and use source information. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 485–522.
Bruner, J. (1973). Going beyond the information given. New York: Norton.
Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science education. Review of Educational Research, 63, 1–49.
Ferretti, T. R., Singer, M., & Patterson, C. (2008). Electrophysiological evidence for the time course of verifying text ideas. Cognition, 108, 881–888.
Flavell, J. H., & Wellman, H. M. (1977). Metamemory. In R. V. Kail & J. W. Hagen (Eds.), Perspectives on the development of memory and cognition (pp. 3–33). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371–395.
Hofer, B. K. (2004). Epistemological understanding as a metacognitive process: Thinking aloud during online searching. Educational Psychologist, 39, 43–55.
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.
Johnson, H. M., & Seifert, C. M. (1994). Sources of the continued influence effect: When misinformation in memory affects later inferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 1420–1436.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inferences, and consciousness. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Johnson-Laird, P. N., Girotto, V., & Legrenzi, P. (2004). Reasoning from inconsistency to consistency. Psychological Review, 111, 640–661.
King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The use of knowledge in discourse processing: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163–202.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Kitchener, K. S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition: A three-level model of cognitive processing. Human Development, 26, 222–232.
Lea, R. B. (1995). On-line evidence for elaborative logical inferences in text. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 18–26.
Lea, R. B., Mulligan, E. J., & Walton, J. L. (2005). Accessing distant premise information: How memory feeds reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 387–395.
Lewandowsky, S., Stritzke, W. G. K., Oberauer, K., & Morales, M. (2005). Memory for fact, fiction, and misinformation. Psychological Science, 16, 190–195.
LimĂłn, M., & Mason, L. (2002). Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
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). New York: Springer.
McKoon, G., Gerrig, R. J., & Greene, S. B. (1996). Pronoun resolution without pronouns: Some consequences of memory-based text processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 919–932.
McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Inference during reading. Psychological Review, 99, 440–466.
McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N. B., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 1–43.
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. 35–53). Mawah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Otero, J., & Kintsch, W. (1992). Failures to detect contradictions in text: What readers believe versus what they read. Psychological Science, 3, 229–235.
Perfetti, C. A., Britt, M. A., & Georgi, M. C. (1995). Text-based learning and reasoning: Studies in history. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
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). Mawah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Pieschl, S., Stahl, E., & Bromme, R. (2008). Epistemological beliefs and self-regulated learning with hypertext. Metacognition and Learning, 3, 17–37.
Richter, T. (2003). Epistemologische Einschätzungen beim Textverstehen [Epistemic validation in text comprehension]. Lengerich, Germany: Pabst.
Richter, T., & Schmid, S. (2010). Epistemological beliefs and epistemic strategies in self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 5, 47–65.
Richter, T., Schroeder, S., & Wöhrmann, B. (2009). You don’t have to believe everything you read: Background knowledge permits fast and efficient validation of information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 538–558.
Ross, L., Lepper, M. R., & Hubbard, M. (1975). Perseverance in self-perception and social perception: Biased attributional processes in the debriefing paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 880–892.
Ross, L., Lepper, M. R., Strack, F., & Steinmetz, J. (1977). Social explanation and social expectation: Effects of real and hypothetical explanations on subjective likelihood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 817–829.
Rouet, J. F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to web-based learning. Mawah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rouet, J. F., Britt, M. A., Mason, R. A., & Perfetti, C. A. (1996). Using multiple sources of evidence to reason about history. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 478–493.
Schmalhofer, F., & Glavanov, D. (1986). Three components of understanding a programmer’s manual: Verbatim, propositional, and situational representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 279–294.
Schmid, S., & Lutz, A. (2007). Epistemologische Überzeugungen als kohärente Laientheorien [Epistemological beliefs as coherent lay theories]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 21, 29–40.
Schroeder, S., Richter, T., & Hoever, I. (2008). Getting a picture that is both accurate and stable: Situation models and epistemic validation. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 237–255.
Singer, M. (2006). Verification of text ideas during reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 574–591.
Singer, M., Halldorson, M., Lear, J. C., & Andrusiak, P. (1992). Validation of causal bridging inferences. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 507–524.
Spiro, R. J., Coulson, R. L., Feltovich, P. J., & Anderson, D. K. (1988). Cognitive flexibility theory: Advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. In V. Patel (Ed.), Tenth annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 375–383). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Spiro, R. J., & Jehng, J. (1990). Cognitive flexibility and hypertext: Theory and technology for the nonlinear and multidimensional traversal of complex subject matter. In D. Nix & R. Spiro (Eds.), Cognition, education, and multimedia: Exploring ideas in high technology (pp. 163–205). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Stahl, E., & Bromme, R. (2007). The CAEB: An instrument for measuring connotative aspects of epistemological beliefs. Learning and Instruction, 17, 773–785.
Tzeng, Y., van den Broek, P., Kendeou, P., & Lee, C. (2005). The computational implementation of the Landscape Model: Modeling inferential processes and memory representations of text comprehension. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 37, 277–286.
van den Broek, P. (2005). Integrating memory-based and constructionist processes in accounts of reading comprehension. Discourse Processes, 39, 299–316.
van den Broek, P., Risden, K., Fletcher, C. R., & Thurlow, R. (1996). A “landscape” view of reading: Fluctuating patterns of activation and the construction of a stable memory representation. In B. K. Britton & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Models of understanding text (pp. 165–187). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45–69.
Voss, J. F., & Wiley, J. (1997). Developing understanding while writing essays in history. International Journal of Educational Research, 27, 255–265.
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.
Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 162–185.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG; grants RI 1100/4-1 and RI 1100/5-1).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Richter, T. (2011). Cognitive Flexibility and Epistemic Validation in Learning from Multiple Texts. In: Elen, J., Stahl, E., Bromme, R., Clarebout, G. (eds) Links Between Beliefs and Cognitive Flexibility. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1793-0_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1793-0_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-1792-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-1793-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)