Chapter published in:
Learning to Read in a Digital World
Edited by Mirit Barzillai, Jenny Thomson, Sascha Schroeder and Paul van den Broek
[Studies in Written Language and Literacy 17] 2018
► pp. 91120
References

References

Afflerbach, P., & Cho, B.
(2009) Determining and describing reading strategies: Internet and traditional forms of reading. In H. S. Waters & W. Schneider (Eds.), Metacognition, strategy use, and instruction (pp. 201–225). New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
Amadieu, F., & Salmerón, L.
(2014) Concept maps for comprehension and navigation of hypertexts. In R. Hanewald & D. Ifenthaler (Eds.), Digital knowledge maps in education (pp. 41–59). New York: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Amadieu, F., van Gog, T., Paas, F., Tricot, A., & Mariné, C.
(2009) Effects of prior knowledge and concept-map structure on disorientation, cognitive load, and learning. Learning and Instruction, 19, 376–386. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Andreassen, R., & Bråten, I.
(2013) Teachers’ source evaluation self-efficacy predicts their use of relevant source features when evaluating the trustworthiness of web sources on special education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44, 821–836. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Anmarkrud, Ø., McCrudden, M. T., Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I.
(2013) Task-oriented reading of multiple documents: Online comprehension processes and offline products. Instructional Science, 41, 873–894. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baddeley, A. D.
(2012) Working memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 1–29. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barzilai, S., & Eshet-Alkalai, Y.
(2015) The role of epistemic perspectives in comprehension of multiple author viewpoints. Learning and Instruction, 36, 86–103. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barzilai, S., Tzadok, E., & Eshet-Alkalai, Y.
(2015) Sourcing while reading divergent expert accounts: Pathways from views of knowing to written argumentation. Instructional Science, 43, 737–766. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bendixen, L. D., & Hartley, K.
(2003) Successful learning with hypermedia: The role of epistemological beliefs and metacognitive awareness. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 28, 15–30. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beker, K., Jolles, D., Lorch, R. F., Jr., & van den Broek, P.
(2016) Learning from texts: Activation of information from previous texts during reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 29, 1161–1178. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Betsch, C., Ulshöfer, C., Renkewitz, F., & Betsch, T.
(2011) The influence of narrative vs. statistic information on perceiving vaccination risks. Medical Decision Making, 31(5), 742–753. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brand-Gruwel, S., Wopereis, I., & Walraven, A.
(2009) A descriptive model of information problem solving while using Internet. Computers & Education, 53, 1207–1217. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bråten, I., Anmarkrud, Ø., Brandmo, C., & Strømsø, H. I.
(2014) Developing and testing a model of direct and indirect relationships between individual differences, processing, and multiple-text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 30, 9–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brusilovsky, P.
(2001) Adaptive hypermedia. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 11, 87–110. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brem, S. K., Russell, J., & Weems, L.
(2001) Science on the web: Student evaluations of scientific arguments. Discourse Processes, 32, 191–213. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cho, B-Y.
(2014) Competent adolescent readers’ use of Internet reading strategies: A think-aloud study. Cognition and Instruction, 32, 252–289. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coiro, J.
(2011) Predicting reading comprehension on the Internet: Contributions of offline comprehension skills, online reading skills, and prior knowledge. Journal of Literacy Research, 43, 352–392. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cromley, J. G., & Azevedo, R.
(2009) Locating information within extended hypermedia. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57, 287–313. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
DeStefano, D., & LeFevre, J. A.
(2007) Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1616–1641. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, L. G., McGeown, S. P., Griffiths, Y. M., Stothard, S. E., & Dobai, A.
(2015) Adolescent reading skill and engagement with digital and traditional literacies as predictors of reading comprehension. British Journal of Psychology, 107, 209–238. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dyson, M. C.
(2004) How physical text layout affects reading from screen. Behaviour & Information Technology, 23, 377–393. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dyson, M. L.
(2005) How do we read text on screen. In H. Van Oostendorp, L. Breure, & A. Dillon (Eds.), Creation, use and deployment of digital information (pp. 279–306). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Eastin, M. S., Yang, M.-S., & Nathanson, A. I.
(2006) Children of the net: An empirical exploration into the evaluation of Internet content. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50, 211–230. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A.
(1993) Protocol analysis. Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J.
(2007) The role of site features, user attributes, and information verification behaviors on the perceived credibility of web-based information. New Media & Society, 9, 319–342. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fogg, B. J., Soohoo, C., Danielson, D. R., Marable, L., Stanford, J., & Tauber, E. R.
(2003) How do users evaluate the credibility of Web sites? A study with over 2,500 participants. In Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Designing for User Experiences (DUX ’03) (pp. 1–15). New York, NY: ACM Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fox, M. C., Ericsson, K. A., & Best, R.
(2011) Do procedures for verbal reporting of thinking have to be reactive? A meta-analysis and recommendations for best reporting methods. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 316–344. Crossref.Google Scholar
Fox, A. B., Rosen, J., & Crawford, M.
(2009) Distractions, distractions: Does instant messaging affect college students’ performance on a concurrent reading comprehension task? Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 12, 51–53. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fu, W. T., & Pirolli, P.
(2007) SNIF-ACT: A cognitive model of user navigation on the World Wide Web. Human–Computer Interaction, 22, 355–412. http://​www​.tandfonline​.com​/doi​/abs​/10​.1080​/07370020701638806.Google Scholar
Gazan, R.
(2010) Microcollaborations in a Social Q&A Community. Information Processing & Management, 46, 693–702. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gerjets, P., & Hellenthal-Schorr, T.
(2008) Competent information search in the World Wide Web: development and evaluation of a web training for pupils. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 693–715. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gerjets, P., Kammerer, Y., & Werner, B.
(2011) Measuring spontaneous and instructed evaluation processes during web search: Integrating concurrent thinking-aloud protocols and eye-tracking data. Learning and Instruction, 21, 220–231. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goldhammer, F., Naumann, J., & Keßel, Y.
(2013) Assessing individual differences in basic computer skills. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 29(4), 263–275. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, S. R., Braasch, J. L. G., Wiley, J., Graesser, A. C., & Brodowinska, K.
(2012) Comprehending and learning from Internet sources: Processing patterns of better and poorer learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 47, 356–381. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Greene, J. A., Yu, S. B., & Copeland, D. Z.
(2014) Measuring critical components of digital literacy and their relationships with learning. Computers and Education, 76, 55–69. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gwizdka, J.
(2009) What a difference a tag cloud makes: Effects of tasks and cognitive abilities on search results interface use. Information Research, 14(4). Retrieved from http://​informationr​.net​/ir​/14​-4​/paper414​.html.Google Scholar
Hahnel, C., Goldhammer, F., Naumann, J., & Kröhne, U.
(2016) Effects of linear reading, basic computer skills, evaluating online information, and navigation on reading digital text. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 486–500. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Halverson, K., Siegel, M., & Freyermuth, S.
(2010) Non-science majors’ critical evaluation of websites in a biotechnology course. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19, 612–620. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hertzum, M., Hansen, K. D., & Andersen, H. H. K.
(2009) Scrutinising usability evaluation: Does thinking aloud affect behavior and mental workload? Behaviour & Information Technology, 28, 165–181. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hilligoss, B., & Rieh, S.
(2008) Developing a unifying framework of credibility assessment: Construct, heuristics, and interaction in context. Information Processing and Management, 44, 1467–1484. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hyönä, J., Lorch, R. F., Jr., & Rinck, M.
(2003) Eye movement measures to study global text processing. In J. Hyönä, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind’s eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 313–334). Amsterdam: Elsevier. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Issa, N., Schuller, M., Santacaterina, S., Shapiro, M., Mayer, R. E., & DaRosa, D. A.
(2011) Applying multimedia design principles enhances learning in medical education. Medical Education, 45, 818–826. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ivanitskaya, L., O’Boyle, I., & Casey, A. M.
(2006) Health information literacy and competencies of information age students: Results from the interactive online research readiness self-assessment (RRSA). Journal of Medical Internet Research, 8(2), e6. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A.
(1980) A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329–355. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Juvina, I., & van Oostendorp, H.
(2008) Modeling semantic and structural knowledge in web navigation. Discourse Processes, 45, 346–364. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kammerer, Y., Amann, D., & Gerjets, P.
(2015) When adults without university education search the Internet for health information: The roles of Internet-specific epistemic beliefs and a source evaluation intervention. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 297–309. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kammerer, Y., Bråten, I., Gerjets, P., & Strømsø, H. I.
(2013) The role of Internet-specific epistemic beliefs in laypersons’ source evaluations and decisions during Web search on a medical issue. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1193–1203. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kammerer, Y., & Gerjets, P.
(2012) Effects of search interface and Internet-specific epistemic beliefs on source evaluations during Web search for medical information: An eye-tracking study. Behaviour & Information Technology, 31, 83–97. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2013) The role of thinking-aloud instructions and prior domain knowledge in information processing and source evaluation during Web search. In M. Knauff, M. Pauen, N. Sebanz, & I. Wachsmuth (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 716–721). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
(2014a) The role of search result position and source trustworthiness in the selection of web search results when using a list or a grid interface. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 30, 177–191. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2014b) Quellenbewertungen und Quellenverweise beim Lesen und Zusammenfassen wissenschaftsbezogener Informationen aus multiplen Webseiten. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 42, 7–23.Google Scholar
Kammerer, Y., Kalbfell, E., & Gerjets, P.
(2016) Is this information source commercially biased? How contradictions between web pages stimulate the consideration of source information. Discourse Processes, 53, 430–456. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keck, D., Kammerer, Y., & Starauschek, E.
(2015) Reading science texts online: Does source information influence the identification of contradictions within texts? Computers & Education, 82, 442–449. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keil, F. C., & Kominsky, J. F.
(2013) Missing links in middle school: Developing use of disciplinary relatedness in evaluating Internet search results. PLoS ONE, 8: e67777. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kiili, C., Laurinen, L., & Marttunen, M.
(2008) Students evaluating Internet sources: From versatile evaluators to uncritical readers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 39, 75–95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kim, S., & Oh, S.
(2009) Users’ relevance criteria for evaluating answers in a social Q&A site. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60, 716–727. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kintsch, W.
(1998) Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kirschner, P. A., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G.
(2013) Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist, 48, 169–183. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kornmann, J., Kammerer, Y., Anjewierden, A., Zettler, I., Trautwein, U., & Gerjets, P.
(2016) How children navigate a multiperspective hypermedia environment: The role of spatial working memory capacity. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 145–158. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kuiper, E., Volman, M., & Terwel, J.
(2008) Integrating critical Web skills and content knowledge: Development and evaluation of a 5th grade educational program. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 666–692. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kurby, C. A., Britt, M. A., & Magliano, J. P.
(2005) The role of top-down and bottom-up processes in between-text integration. Reading Psychology, 26, 335–362. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lawless, K. A., & Kulikowich, J. M.
(1996) Understanding hypertext navigation through cluster analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 14, 385–399. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1998) Domain knowledge, interest and hypertext navigation: A study of individual differences. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7, 51–69.Google Scholar
Lawless, K. A., Mills, R., & Brown, S. W.
(2002) Children’s hypertext navigation strategies. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34, 274–284. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leu, D. J., Forzani, E., Rhoads, C., Maykel, C., Kennedy, C., & Timbrell, N.
(2015) The new literacies of online research and comprehension: Rethinking the reading achievement gap. Reading Research Quarterly, 50, 37–59. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lucassen, T., Muilwijk, R., Noordzij, M. L., & Schraagen, J. M.
(2013) Topic familiarity and information skills in online credibility evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64, 254–264. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Macedo-Rouet, M., Braasch, J., Britt, M. A., & Rouet, J.-F.
(2013) Teaching fourth and fifth graders to evaluate information sources during text comprehension. Cognition and Instruction, 31, 204–226. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mason, L., Junyent, A. A., & Tornatora, M. C.
(2014) Epistemic evaluation and comprehension of web-source information on controversial science-related topics: Effects of a short-term instructional intervention. Computers & Education, 76, 143–157. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
MaKinster, J. G., Beghetto, R. A., & Plucker, J. A.
(2002) Why can’t I find Newton’s Third Law?: Case studies of students using of the Web as a science resource. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11, 155–172. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Brønnick, K.
(2013) Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 58, 61–68. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Margolin, S. J., Driscoll, C., Toland, M. J., & Kegler, J. L.
(2013) E‐readers, computer screens, or paper: Does reading comprehension change across media platforms? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27, 512–519. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mason, L., Pluchino, P., & Ariasi, N.
(2014) Reading information about a scientific phenomenon on web pages varying for reliability: An eye-movement analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62, 663–685. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E.
(2005) Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31–48). New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. P.
(2009) Towards a comprehensive model of comprehension. In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 51, pp. 297–284). New York, NY: Elsevier Science. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., & Medders, R. B.
(2010) Social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation online. Journal of Communication, 60, 413–439. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Naumann, J.
(2015) A model of online reading engagement: Linking engagement, navigation, and performance in digital reading. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 263–277. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) Log file analysis in hypertext research: An overview, a meta-analysis, and some suggestions for future research. In J. J. Cañas (Ed.), Workshop on cognition and the web: Information processing, comprehension and learning (pp. 53–56). Granada, Spain: University of Granada.Google Scholar
Naumann, J., Richter, T., Christmann, U., & Groeben, N.
(2008) Working memory capacity and reading skill moderate the effectiveness of strategy trainings in learning from hypertext. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 197–213. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Naumann, J., Richter, T., Flender, J., Christmann, U., & Groeben, N.
(2007) Signaling in expository hypertexts compensates for deficits in reading skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 791–213. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Naumann, J., & Salmerón, L.
(2016) Does navigation always predict performance? Effects of relevant page selection on digital reading performance are moderated by offline comprehension skills. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17, 42–59. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Olive, T., Rouet, J.-F., Francois, E., & Zampa, V.
(2008) Summarizing digital documents: Effects of alternate or simultaneous window display. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 541–558. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Olston, C., & Chi, E. H.
(2003) ScentTrials: Integrating browsing and searching on the Web. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 10, 177–197. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ophir, E., Nass, C. I., & Wagner, A. D.
(2009) Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 106, 15583–15587. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Paas, F., & Sweller, J.
(2014) Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 27–42). New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pan, B., Hembrooke, H., Joachims, T., Lorigo, L., Gay, G., & Granka, L.
(2007) In Google we trust: Users’ decisions on rank, position, and relevance. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 801–823. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Paul, J., Macedo-Rouet, M., Stadtler, M., & Rouet, J.-F.
(2016) Why attend to source information when reading online? The perspective of ninth grade students from two different countries. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Pieschl, S., Stahl, E., & Bromme, R.
(2008) Epistemological beliefs and self-regulated learning with hypertext. Metacognition and Learning, 3, 17–37. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pirolli, P.
(2007) Information foraging theory: Adaptive interaction with information. New York: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P.
(1995) Verbal protocols of reading. The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Price, C. J.
(2012) A review and synthesis of the first 20 years of PET and fMRI studies of heard speech, spoken language and reading. Neuroimage, 62, 816–847. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Puntambekar, S., & Goldstein, J.
(2007) Effect of visual representation of the conceptual structure of the domain on science learning and navigation in a hypertext environment. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 16, 429.Google Scholar
Rayner, K.
(2009) Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1457–1506. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Richter, T., Naumann, J., & Noller, S.
(2003) LOGPAT: A semi-automatic way to analyze hypertext navigation behavior. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 62, 113. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rieh, S. Y.
(2002) Judgment of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53, 145–161. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Robins, D., & Holmes, J.
(2008) Aesthetics and credibility in a website design. Information Processing & Management, 44, 386–399. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rouet, J. F.
(2006) The skills of document use: From text comprehension to Web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Rouet, J.-F., & Britt, M. A.
(2014) Multimedia learning from multiple documents. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 813–841). New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rouet, J.-F., Ros, C., Goumi, A., Macedo-Rouet, M., & Dinet, J.
(2011) The influence of surface and deep cues on primary and secondary school students’ assessment of relevance in Web menus. Learning and Instruction, 21, 205–219. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Salmerón, L., Cañas, J. J., Kintsch, W., & Fajardo, I.
(2005) Reading strategies and hypertext comprehension. Discourse Processes, 40, 171–191. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Salmerón, L., Cerdán, R., & Naumann, J.
(2015) How adolescents navigate Wikipedia to answer questions. Infancia y Aprendizaje: Journal for the Study of Education and Development, 38, 435–471. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Salmerón, L., Gil, L., Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I.
(2010) Comprehension effects of signaling relationships between documents in search engines. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 419–426. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Salmerón, L., & García, V.
(2011) Comprehension skills and children’s navigation strategies in hypertext. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1143–1151. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Salmerón, L., Kintsch, W., & Cañas, J. J.
(2006) Reading strategies and prior knowledge in learning with hypertext. Memory & Cognition, 34, 1157–1171. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Salmerón, L., Macedo-Rouet, M., & Rouet, J-F.
(2016) Multiple viewpoints increase students’ attention to source features in social question and answer forum messages. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67, 2404–2419. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Salmerón, L., Naumann, J., García, V., & Fajardo, I.
(in press). Scanning and deep processing of information in hypertext: An eye-tracking and cued retrospective think-aloud study. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 10.1111/jcal.12152
Sanchez, C., & Wiley, J.
(2009) To scroll or not to scroll: Interactions of text presentation and working memory capacity. Human Factors, 51, 730–738. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Scheiter, K., & Van Gog, T.
(2009) Using eye tracking in applied research to study and stimulate the processing of information from multi-representational sources. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 1209–1214. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Scharrer, L., Britt, M. A., Stadtler, M., & Bromme, R.
(2013) Easy to understand but difficult to decide: Information comprehensibility and controversiality affect laypeople’s science-based decisions. Discourse Processes, 50, 361–387. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Scharrer, L., Bromme, R., Britt, M. A., & Stadtler, M.
(2012) The seduction of easiness: How science depictions influence laypeople’s reliance on their own evaluation of scientific information. Learning and Instruction, 22, 231–243. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Scharrer, L., Stadtler, M., & Bromme, R.
(2014) You’d better ask an expert: Mitigating the comprehensibility effect on laypeople’s decisions about science-based knowledge claims. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, 465–471. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M.
(2003) Construction and inference in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13, 141–156. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L.
(2009) Learning in a sheltered Internet environment: The use of Webquests. Learning and Instruction, 19, 423–432. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Singer, L. M., & Alexander, P. A.
(in press). Reading across mediums: Effects of reading digital and print texts on comprehension and calibration. The Journal of Experimental Education. Crossref
Singer, M.
(2013) Validation in reading comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 362–366. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stadtler, M., & Bromme, R.
(2007) Dealing with multiple documents on the WWW: The role of metacognition in the formation of documents models. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2, 191–210. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2014) The content–source integration model: A taxonomic description of how readers comprehend conflicting scientific information. In D. N. Rapp & J. L. G. Braasch (Eds.), Processing inaccurate information: Theoretical and applied perspectives from cognitive science and the educational sciences (pp. 379–402). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Stadtler, M., Bromme, R., & Rouet, J.-F.
(in press). Learning from multiple documents: How can we foster multiple document literacy skills in a sustainable way? In E. Manalo, Y. Uesaka, & C. Chinn (Eds.) Promoting spontaneous use of learning and reasoning strategies: Theory, research, and practice.Singapore: Routledge.
Stadtler, M., Scharrer, L., Macedo-Rouet, M., Rouet, J.-F., & Bromme, R.
(2016) Improving vocational students’ consideration of source information when deciding about science controversies. Reading and Writing, 29, 705–729. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stadtler, M., Paul, J., Globoschütz, S., & Bromme, R.
(2015) Watch out! - An instruction raising students’ epistemic vigilance augments their sourcing activities. In D. C. Noelle, R. Dale, A. S. Warlaumont, J. Yoshimi, T. Matlock, C. D. Jennings, & P. P. Maglio (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2278–2283). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Strømsø, H. I., Bråten, I., Britt, M. A., & Ferguson, L. E.
(2013) Spontaneous sourcing among students reading multiple documents. Cognition and Instruction, 31, 176–203. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Subrahmanyam, K., Michikyan, M., Clemmons, C., Carrillo, R., Uhls, Y. T., & Greenfield, P. M.
(2013) Learning from paper, learning from screens: Impact of screen reading and multitasking conditions on reading and writing among college students. International Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning, 3, 1–27. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, S., Gnesdilow, D., & Puntambekar, S.
(2011) Navigation behaviors and strategies used by middle school students to learn from a science hypertext. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 20, 387.Google Scholar
Sullivan, S. A., & Puntambekar, S.
(2015) Learning with digital texts: Exploring the impact of prior domain knowledge and reading comprehension ability on navigation and learning outcomes. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 299–313. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sung, Y. T., Wu, M. D., Chen, C. K., & Chang, K. E.
(2015) Examining the online reading behavior and performance of fifth-graders: Evidence from eye-movement data. Frontiers in psychology, 6, 665. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van den Broek, P., & Kendeou, P.
(2015) Building coherence in Web-based and other non-traditional reading environments: Cognitive opportunities and challenges. In R. J. Spiro, M. DeSchryver, M. S. Hagerman, P. M. Morsink, & P. Thompson (Eds.), Reading at a crossroads? Disjunctures and continuities in current conceptions and practices (pp. 104–114). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
van Oostendorp, H.
(2002) Updating mental representations during reading scientific text. In J. Otero, J. A. León, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 309–329). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
van Strien, J. L. H., Kammerer, Y., Brand-Gruvel, S., & Boshuizen, H. P. A.
(2016) How attitude strength biases information processing and evaluation on the web. Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 245–252. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vibert, N., Ros, C., Le Bigot, L., Ramond, M., Gatefin, J., & Rouet, J.-F.
(2009) Effects of domain knowledge on reference search with the PubMed database: An experimental study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60, 1423–1447. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vidal-Abarca, E., Mañá, A., & Gil, L.
(2010) Individual differences for self-regulating task-oriented reading activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 817–826. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walraven, A., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Boshuizen, H. P.
(2009) How students evaluate information and sources when searching the World Wide Web for information. Computers & Education, 52, 234–246. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walraven, A., Brand-Gruvel, S., & Boshuizen, H. P. A.
(2013) Fostering students’ evaluation behavior while searching the Internet. Instructional Science, 41, 125–146. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
White, R. W., Dumais, S. T., & Teevan, J.
(2009) Characterizing the influence of domain expertise on Web search behavior. In R. Baeza Yates et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM ’09) (pp. 132–142). New York: ACM Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wiley, J.
(2001) Supporting understanding through task and browser design. In Proceedings of the Twenty-third annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society  (pp. 1136–1143). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Wiley, J., Goldman, S., Graesser, A., Sanchez. C., Ash, I., & Hemmerich, J.
(2009) Source evaluation, comprehension, and learning in Internet science inquiry tasks. American Educational Research Journal. 46, 1060–1106. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Winne, P. H.
(2010) Improving measurements of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 45, 267–276. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Winter, S., & Krämer, N. C.
(2012) Selecting science information in Web 2.0: How source cues, message sidedness, and need for cognition influence users’ exposure to blog posts. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18, 80–96. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wirth, W., Böcking, T., Karnowski, V., & von Pape, T.
(2007) Heuristic and systematic use of search engines. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 778–800. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, S., & Duke, N. K.
(2011) The impact of instruction in the WWWDOT framework on students’ disposition and ability to evaluate Websites as sources of information. The Elementary School Journal, 112, 132–154. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Barzilai, Sarit, Asnat R. Zohar & Shiri Mor-Hagani
2018. Promoting Integration of Multiple Texts: a Review of Instructional Approaches and Practices. Educational Psychology Review 30:3  pp. 973 ff. Crossref logo
Beker, Katinka, Paul van den Broek & Dietsje Jolles
2019. Children’s integration of information across texts: reading processes and knowledge representations. Reading and Writing 32:3  pp. 663 ff. Crossref logo
Böhme, Richard, Meike Munser-Kiefer & Sarah Prestridge
2020. Lernunterstützung mit digitalen Medien in der Grundschule. Zeitschrift für Grundschulforschung 13:1  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Chen, Keliang, Yunxiao Zu & Yansong Cui
2020. Design and implementation of bilingual digital reader based on artificial intelligence and big data technology. Journal of Computational Methods in Sciences and Engineering 20:3  pp. 889 ff. Crossref logo
Coiro, Julie
2020. Toward a Multifaceted Heuristic of Digital Reading to Inform Assessment, Research, Practice, and Policy. Reading Research Quarterly Crossref logo
Delgado, Pablo, Elisabeth Stang Lund, Ladislao Salmerón & Ivar Bråten
2020. To click or not to click: investigating conflict detection and sourcing in a multiple document hypertext environment. Reading and Writing 33:8  pp. 2049 ff. Crossref logo
Delgado, Pablo, Vicenta Ávila, Inmaculada Fajardo & Ladislao Salmerón
2019. Training young adults with intellectual disability to read critically on the internet. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities 32:3  pp. 666 ff. Crossref logo
Hahn, Oliver, Steffen Lemke, Athanasios Mazarakis & Isabella Peters
2020.  In Proceedings of the Conference on Mensch und Computer,  pp. 61 ff. Crossref logo
Hoppe, Anett, Ran Yu, Yvonne Kammerer & Ladislao Salmerón
2020.  In Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management,  pp. 3535 ff. Crossref logo
Mangen, Anne, Gérard Olivier & Jean-Luc Velay
2019. Comparing Comprehension of a Long Text Read in Print Book and on Kindle: Where in the Text and When in the Story?. Frontiers in Psychology 10 Crossref logo
Máñez, Ignacio, Eduardo Vidal-Abarca, Panayiota Kendeou & Tomás Martínez
2019. How do students process complex formative feedback in question-answering tasks? A think-aloud study. Metacognition and Learning 14:1  pp. 65 ff. Crossref logo
Naumann, Johannes
2019. The Skilled, the Knowledgeable, and the Motivated: Investigating the Strategic Allocation of Time on Task in a Computer-Based Assessment. Frontiers in Psychology 10 Crossref logo
Parodi Sweis, Giovanni, Tomás Moreno-de-León & Cristobal Julio
2020. Comprensión de textos escritos: reconceptualizaciones en torno a las demandas del siglo XXI. Íkala 25:3  pp. 775 ff. Crossref logo
Riddell, Judith E.
2019.  In Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies,  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Riddell, Judith E.
2020.  In Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies,  pp. 1104 ff. Crossref logo
Rouet, Jean-François, Julie Ayroles, Mônica Macedo-Rouet & Anna Potocki
2020.  In Understanding and Improving Information Search [Human–Computer Interaction Series, ],  pp. 185 ff. Crossref logo
Salmerón, Ladislao & Pablo Delgado
2019. Critical analysis of the effects of the digital technologies on reading and learning / Análisis crítico sobre los efectos de las tecnologías digitales en la lectura y el aprendizaje. Cultura y Educación 31:3  pp. 465 ff. Crossref logo
Strømsø, Helge I., Ivar Bråten & Eva W. Brante
2020. Profiles of warm engagement and cold evaluation in multiple-document comprehension. Reading and Writing 33:9  pp. 2337 ff. Crossref logo
Vanhees, Claudio, Mathea Simons & Vanessa Joosen
2020.  In Recent Tools for Computer- and Mobile-Assisted Foreign Language Learning [Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design, ],  pp. 79 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 01 december 2020. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.