The influences of text and reader characteristics on learning from refutations in science texts.

By Jason L. G. Braasch, Susan R. Goldman, Jennifer Wiley. 2013

101 citations recorded by the source corpus.

© 2013 American Psychological Association. This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record. The original publication is available at www.apa.org; DOI: 10.1037/a0032627

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5f23fcc2b091e5c6c4f06f0340c297b5fd63e49e

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

1. Tamara van Gog
2. J. V. van Merriënboer
3. Anique B. H. de Bruin
4. Kathryn S. McCarthy
5. M. Loon
6. Fred Paas
7. Danielle S. McNamara
8. John Dunlosky

In Education

1. J. V. van Merriënboer
2. Tamara van Gog
3. Anique B. H. de Bruin
4. Kathryn S. McCarthy
5. Danielle S. McNamara
6. John Dunlosky
7. Fred Paas
8. Scott Andrew Crossley

Citations in the corpus

• The Multidimensional Knowledge in Text Comprehension framework (2021, background): “Further, these students demonstrated greater overconfidence in their performance (Prinz et al., 2018; see also Braasch et al., 2013).”
• Refutations in science texts lead to hypercorrection of misconceptions held with high confidence (2015, background): “Therefore, standard text formats may not be effective for correcting misconceptions, because explanations in the studied text do not undermine the perceived truth of learners’ science misconceptions (Braasch et al., 2013; Diakidoy, Kendeou, & Ioannides, 2003).”