The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comprehending and Learning From Internet Sources: Processing Patterns of Better and Poorer Learners
Open accessAbstract
Readers increasingly attempt to understand and learn from information sources they find on the Internet. Doing so highlights the crucial role that evaluative processes play in selecting and making sense of the information. In a prior study, Wiley et al. (2009, Experiment 1) asked undergraduates to perform a web‐based inquiry task about volcanoes using multiple Internet sources. A major finding established a clear link between learning outcomes, source evaluations, and reading behaviors. The present study used think‐aloud protocol methodology to better understand the processing that learners engaged in during this task: 10 better learners were contrasted with 11 poorer learners. Results indicate that better learners engaged in more sense‐making, self‐explanation, and comprehension‐monitoring processes on reliable sites as compared with unreliable sites, and did so by a larger margin than did poorer learners. Better learners also engaged in more goal‐directed navigation than poorer learners. Case studies of two better and two poorer learners further illustrate how evaluation processes contributed to navigation decisions. Findings suggest that multiple‐source comprehension is a dynamic process that involves interplay among sense‐making, monitoring, and evaluation processes, all of which promote strategic reading.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Studying as Self-Regulated Learning
(1998) · Metacognition in Educational Theory and Practice · doi:10.4324/9781410602350-19 · Cited by 1,589
Handbook of Metacognition in Education
Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (2009) · doi:10.4324/9780203876428 · Cited by 1,509
Self-citationForegrounding the Disciplines in Secondary Literacy Teaching and Learning: A Call for Change
Moje, E. B. (2008) · Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy · doi:10.1598/jaal.52.2.1 · Cited by 785 · cited 1×
“When experts read articles in their field to advance their own understanding of a phenomenon, they explicitly consider the reliability of the information sources (Chinn & Malhotra, 2002; Leinhardt & Young, 1996; Moje, 2008; Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008; Wineburg, 1991, 1998).”
BackgroundSource Evaluation, Comprehension, and Learning in Internet Science Inquiry Tasks
Wiley, J., Goldman, S. R., Graesser, A. C., Sanchez, C. A., Ash, I. K., & Hemmerich, J. A. (2009) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/0002831209333183 · Cited by 419
Self-citationRouet, J.-F. (2006) · doi:10.4324/9780203820094 · Cited by 337 · cited 2×
“…357 produce a coherent solution to a problem or an answer to an inquiry question (Bråten, Strømsø, & Britt, 2009; Britt & Aglinskas, 2002; Goldman, 2004, 2010; Lawless, Goldman, Gomez, Manning, & Braasch, in press; Leu et al., 2008; Rouet, 2006; Wallace, Kupperman, Krajcik, & Soloway, 2000).”
BackgroundKuiper, E., Volman, M., & Terwel, J. (2005) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543075003285 · Cited by 273
Cited by
Can Students Evaluate Online Sources? Learning From Assessments of Civic Online Reasoning
McGrew, S., Breakstone, J., Ortega, T., Smith, M., & Wineburg, S. (2018) · Theory & Research in Social Education · doi:10.1080/00933104.2017.1416320 · Cited by 533
The Public's Bounded Understanding of Science
Bromme, R., & Goldman, S. R. (2014) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2014.921572 · Cited by 282
Self-citationTorppa, M., Niemi, P., Vasalampi, K., Lerkkanen, M.-K., Tolvanen, A., & Poikkeus, A.-M. (2020) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/cdev.13241 · Cited by 177
Toward an Integrated Framework of Multiple Text Use
List, A., & Alexander, P. A. (2019) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2018.1505514 · Cited by 147
Nelms, A. A., & Segura-Totten, M. (2019) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.18-05-0077 · Cited by 50
Challenging approaches: Sharing and responding to weak digital heuristics in class discussions
McGrew, S. (2021) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2021.103512 · Cited by 37
Students’ Sourcing While Reading and Writing From Multiple Web Documents
Strømsø, H. I., & Bråten, I. (2014) · Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy · doi:10.18261/issn1891-943x-2014-02-02 · Cited by 35
How do students integrate multiple texts? An investigation of top-down processing
List, A., Du, H., & Lee, H. Y. (2021) · European Journal of Psychology of Education · doi:10.1007/s10212-020-00497-y · Cited by 21
Gottschling, S., & Kammerer, Y. (2021) · Discourse Processes · doi:10.1080/0163853x.2021.1930808 · Cited by 11
Guan, Z.-H., & Lin, S. S. J. (2025) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105362 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Goldman, S. R., Braasch, J. L. G., Wiley, J., Graesser, A. C., & Brodowinska, K.
- Venue
- Reading Research Quarterly
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-10
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 356-381
- ISSN
- 0034-0553 (ISSN-L)
- 1936-2722
- OpenAlex
- W2160920907
- Cited by
- 341
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 40.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
