Is This Information Source Commercially Biased? How Contradictions Between Web Pages Stimulate the Consideration of Source Information

The Discrepancy-Induced Source Comprehension (D-ISC) Model: Basic Assumptions and Preliminary Evidence

“…The empirical evidence supports that readers spend more time processing information sources and displaying a better memory for them when a discrepancy is present. The effects replicated using very simple single texts ensuring that discrepant ideas were co-activated in working memory Rouet, et al, 2016), but also with more complex materials where discrepancies were present across multiple texts (Kammerer, et al, 2016). In the latter case, we assume that text propositions residing in working memory acted as retrieval cues for related concepts to become automatically and passively activated from long-term memory (Kendeou & O'Brien, 2014;Kintsch, 1998;Myers & O'Brien, 1998;O'Brien & Myers, 1999;O'Brien & Cook, 2016).…”

“…In the studies reviewed thus far, researchers experimentally manipulated whether contradictions were present or absent within a single text Rouet, et al, 2016), or across multiple texts (Kammerer, et al, 2016). Recent extensions empirically validate D-ISC's assumptions when a single text contradicts to varying degrees readers' pre-existing beliefs.…”

“…Finally, readers of contradictory information considered the commercially-biased page to be less convincing and less trustworthy than those reading consistent information, which was assessed, again, after reading. As such, Kammerer and Gerjets (2012) and Kammerer et al (2016) can be interpreted as supporting D-ISC's assumptions using an authentic reading context: attempting to acquire health information from multiple diverse Internet sources for the purposes of making behavioral decisions. examined the role of readers' epistemic perspectives -how they think about how people know -when comprehending authors' viewpoints within multiple text reading contexts.…”

“…In the second main section, we review empirical evidence for the processing and representational assumptions DISCREPANCIES INDUCE SOURCING 5 of D-ISC from single and multiple text comprehension research. Although the paradigms and materials used across these empirical studies are broad in scope, all involve situations in which a reader has to deal with information in text that contradicts information presented in previouslyread text (either within the same text or across multiple texts), or with prior beliefs or knowledge activated from long-term memory Braasch, et al, 2012;Braasch, McCabe, & Daniel, 2016;Bråten, Salmerón, & Strømsø, 2016;Kammerer & Gerjets, 2012;Kammerer, Kalbfell, & Gerjets, 2016;Maier & Richter, 2013;Rouet, Le Bigot, de Pereyra, & Britt, 2016). The goal of this section is to evaluate the degree to which the various effects derived from experiments support the processing assumptions of D-ISC, which describes moment-by-moment changes during reading.…”

“…In Kammerer et al (2016), German university students read two web pages to be able to write a recommendation on whether the national football team should allow their athletes to take a fictitious nutritional supplement. Readers were randomly assigned to one of three text conditions.…”