Measuring strategic processing when students read multiple texts

By Ivar Bråten, Helge I. Strømsø. 2011

118 citations recorded by the source corpus.

This study explored the dimensionality of multiple-text comprehension strategies in a sample of 216 Norwegian education undergraduates who read seven separate texts on a science topic and immediately afterwards responded to a self-report inventory focusing on strategic multiple-text processing in that specific task context. Two dimensions were identified through factor analysis: one concerning the accumulation of pieces of information from the different texts and one concerning cross-text elaboration. In a subsample of 71 students who were also administered measures of intratextual and intertextual comprehension after responding to the strategy inventory, hierarchical multiple regression analysis indicated that self-reported accumulation of information and cross-text elaboration explained variance in intertextual comprehension even after variance associated with prior knowledge had been removed.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/411fc30f9fac6ad6c21b6cf04d1311fa31a7fbe3

How researchers see this paper

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

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Toward an Integrated Framework of Multiple Text Use (2019, methodology): “Elsewhere, engagement in cross-textual linking has been captured by students’ endorsement of items corresponding to the cross-textual elaboration dimension of the Multiple Text Strategy Inventory (Bråten & Strømsø, 2011).”
Revising the Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI) and testing for factorial invariance (2018, background): “…use strategies to a different extent in different contexts, even in academic reading, and context-free measures do not accurately reflect strategy use for all of those contexts (e.g., Bråten & Strømsø, 2011; Hadwin, Winne, Stockley, Nesbit, & Woszczyna, 2001; Pressley, 2000; Veenman, 2011).”
Reading on Paper and Digitally: What the Past Decades of Empirical Research Reveal (2017, background): “There are also well-articulated models of learning and performance when multiple texts are implicated (Bråten & Strømsø, 2011; Rouet & Britt, 2011).”