Dimensions of topic-specific epistemological beliefs as predictors of multiple text understanding

124 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Epistemic metacognition in context: evaluating and learning online information (2010, background): “It is also in line with outcomes of research on the relationship between topic-specific beliefs and understanding of multiple texts ( Stromso et al. 2008 ).”
Measuring strategic processing when students read multiple texts (2011, methodology): “Further information about the design and validity of the InterVT, as well as a number of sample items for both types of verification tasks used in the present study, are contained in prior work (Bråten et al. 2009; Bråten and Strømsø 2010; Bråten et al. 2008; Strømsø et al. 2008).”
Understanding and Integrating Multiple Science Texts: Summary Tasks are Sometimes Better Than Argument Tasks (2010, methodology): “Further information about the design and validity of the InterVT, as well as a number of sample items for all the three types of verification tasks used in the present study, are contained in prior work (Bråten & Strømsø, in press; Bråten et al., 2008; Strømsø et al., 2008).”
The Role of Epistemic Beliefs in the Comprehension of Multiple Expository Texts: Toward an Integrated Model (2011, background): “There are consistent findings supporting the notion that believing knowledge to be complex rather that simple may be facilitative when readers try to build an integrated understanding across texts (e.g., Bråten & Strømsø, 2010b; Rukavina & Daneman, 1996; Strømsø et al., 2008).”