Sourcing in the reading process: introduction to the special issue

Scharrer, Lisa; Salmerón, Ladislao

doi:10.1007/s11145-016-9676-2

Cited by 27 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The current study contributes to the literature on "sourcing in the reading process" (Scharrer & Salmerón, 2016) by showing that memory for conflicting textual information uniquely predicts sourcing in the form of source-content representation when adolescents read multiple expository texts on a controversial scientific (i.e., health) issue. That is, even when controlling for differences in gender, prior knowledge, and interest, as well as including a measure of self-reported critical reading strategies in the regression equation, we found that the better participants remembered that the texts presented conflicting claims on the issue, the more likely they also were to include source-content links in their mental representations of the texts.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Memory for Textual Conflicts Predicts Sourcing When Adolescents Read Multiple Expository Texts

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated whether memory for conflicting information predicted mental representation of source-content links (i.e., who said what) in a sample of 86 Norwegian adolescent readers. Participants read four texts presenting conflicting claims about sun exposure and health. With differences in gender, prior knowledge, and interest controlled for, and with self-reported critical reading strategies also included in a multiple regression analysis, it was found that the better participants remembered that the texts presented conflicting claims on the issue, the more likely they were to include source-content links in their mental representations of the texts. Theoretical and educational implications of the findings are discussed, and directions for future research are provided.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Memory for Textual Conflicts Predicts Sourcing When Adolescents Read Multiple Expository Texts

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, children’s documented epistemic vigilance towards spoken testimony appears to stand in sharp contrast to their limited epistemic vigilance online. Nonetheless, while past research suggests that children are failing to engage in ‘sourcing’ online (i.e., processing and evaluating information about the source; see Scharrer & Salmerón, 2016), we do not know to what extent they take a critical stance regarding the quality of the text content (i.e., what is written). Yet, both types of evaluation are key mechanisms for guarding against misinformation (Sperber et al , 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Epistemic vigilance online: Textual inaccuracy and children's selective trust in webpages

Einav

Levey

Patel

et al. 2020

British J of Dev Psycho

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this age of 'fake news', it is crucial that children are equipped with the skills to identify unreliable information online. Our study is the first to examine whether children are influenced by the presence of inaccuracies contained in webpages when deciding which sources to trust. Forty-eight 8-to 10-year-olds viewed three pairs of webpages, relating to the same topics, where one webpage per pair contained three obvious inaccuracies (factual, typographical, or exaggerations, according to condition). The paired webpages offered conflicting claims about two novel facts. We asked participants questions pertaining to the novel facts to assess whether they systematically selected answers from the accurate sources. Selective trust in the accurate webpage was found in the typos condition only. This study highlights the limitations of 8-to 10-year-olds in critically evaluating the accuracy of webpage content and indicates a potential focus for educational intervention.

show abstract

“…The evaluation of sources is important, painstaking work and research suggests that students do not spontaneously engage in this activity while reading online (Scharrer & Salmerón, 2016). Still, several recent studies have shown that students can become better at sourcing (e.g., Bråten, Brante, & Strømsø, 2019; McGrew et al, 2019), though sourcing has several notable limitations (Sinatra & Lombardi, 2020).…”

Section: Theoretical Framing and Relevant Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Fighting “bad science” in the information age: The effects of an intervention to stimulate evaluation and critique of false scientific claims

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With developments in technology (e.g., “Web 2.0” sites that allow users to author and create media content) and the removal of publication barriers, the quality of science information online now varies vastly. These changes in the review of published science information, along with increased facility of information distribution, have resulted in the spread of misinformation about science. As such, the role of evaluation when reading scientific claims has become a pressing issue when educating students. While recent studies have examined educational strategies for supporting evaluation of sources and plausibility of claims, there is little extant work on supporting students in critiquing the claims for flawed scientific reasoning. This study tested the efficacy of a structured reading support intervention for evaluation and critique on cultivating a critical awareness of flawed scientific claims in an online setting. We developed and validated a questionnaire to measure epistemic vigilance, implemented a large‐scale (N = 1081) Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) of an original reading activity that elicits evaluation and critique of scientific claims, and measured whether the intervention increased epistemic vigilance of misinformation. Our RCT results suggested a moderate effect in students who complied with the treatment intervention. Furthermore, analyses of heterogeneous effects suggested that the intervention effects were driven by 11th‐grade students and students who self‐reported a moderate trust in science and medicine. Our findings point to the need for additional opportunities and instruction for students on critiquing scientific claims and the nature of specific errors in scientific reasoning.

show abstract

Sourcing in the reading process: introduction to the special issue

Cited by 27 publications

References 47 publications

Memory for Textual Conflicts Predicts Sourcing When Adolescents Read Multiple Expository Texts

Memory for Textual Conflicts Predicts Sourcing When Adolescents Read Multiple Expository Texts

Epistemic vigilance online: Textual inaccuracy and children's selective trust in webpages

Fighting “bad science” in the information age: The effects of an intervention to stimulate evaluation and critique of false scientific claims

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About