Hostname: page-component-669899f699-vbsjw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-28T00:52:11.821Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Self-Generated Explanations on the Question Demands are not Always Helpful

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2013

Raquel Cerdán ,
Ramiro Gilabert  and
Eduardo Vidal-Abarca
Raquel Cerdán*
Affiliation:
Universidad de Valencia (Spain)
Ramiro Gilabert
Affiliation:
Universidad de Valencia (Spain)
Eduardo Vidal-Abarca
Affiliation:
Universidad de Valencia (Spain)
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Raquel Cerdán. Universidad de Valencia. Department of Developmental and Educational Psychology. Avda. Blasco Ibáñez, 21. 46010. Valencia (Spain). E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study had two main purposes. First, to measure high-school students’ task model representation under the instruction to self-explain questions; second, to test the effects of self-generated explanations on task-demands understanding and performance on questions. We designed a simple experimental situation where high-school students were asked to read two texts and answer questions. Only in half of the questions students were required to self-explain with their own words what the question was asking them for before answering. Contrary to our expectations, self-explaining the questions did not significantly affect skilled comprehenders, whereas it hindered performance in less-skilled comprehenders. Moreover, it inhibited their active engagement in search for textual units of information. Less-skilled comprehenders’ explanation protocols included inaccuracies, with consequences on the search process and success in the task. The relationship among quality of task model, search for information and success is discussed in light of the TRACE model (Rouet, 2006).

Keywords

task-oriented readingself-explanationscomprehensionindividual differences
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 16 , 2013 , E26
Copyright
Copyright © Universidad Complutense de Madrid and Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

This research was conducted with the financial support of the Spanish Ministerio de Educación (Project: EDU2008-03072/EDUC)

References

Best, R., Ozuru, Y., & McNamara, D. S. (2004). Self-explaining science texts: Strategies, knowledge, and reading skill. In Kafai, Y. B., Sandoval, W. A., Enyedy, N., Nixon, A. S., & Herrera, F. (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixth International Conference of the Learning Sciences: Embracing diversity in the Learning Sciences (pp. 89–96). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cerdán, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2008). The effects of tasks on integrating information from multiple documents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 209–222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.209 Google Scholar
Cerdán, R., Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, T., Gilabert, R., & Gil, L. (2009). Impact of question-answering tasks on search processes and reading comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 19, 13–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.12.003 Google Scholar
Cerdán, R., Gilabert, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2011). Selecting information to answer questions: Strategic individual differences when searching texts. Learning and Iindividual differences, 21, 201–205. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2010.11.007 Google Scholar
Chi, M., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, R., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanation: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145–182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(89)90002-5 Google Scholar
Chi, M. T. H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439–477. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1803_3 Google Scholar
Glenberg, A. M., Wilkinson, A. C., & Epstein, W. (1982). The illusion of knowing: Failure in the self-assessment of comprehension. Memory and Cognition, 10, 597–602. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03202442 Google Scholar
Graesser, A. C., & Franklin, S. P. (1990). QUEST: A model of question-answering. Discourse Processes, 13, 279–303. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01638539009544760 Google Scholar
Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371–395. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0033-295X.101.3.371 Google Scholar
Hannon, B., & Daneman, M. (2004). Shallow semantic processing of text: An individual-differences account. Discourse Processes, 37, 187–204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp3703_1 Google Scholar
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Magliano, J. P., & Millis, K. K. (2003). Assessing reading skill with a think-aloud procedure and latent semantic analysis. Cognition and Instruction, 21, 251–283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI2103_02 Google Scholar
McCrudden, M. T., & Schraw, G. (2007). Relevance and goal-focusing in text processing. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 113–139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9010-7 Google Scholar
McNamara, D. S., O’Reilly, T., Best, R., & Ozuru, Y. (2006). Improving adolescent students’ reading comprehension with iSTART. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34, 147–171. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/1RU5-HDTJ-A5C8-JVWE Google Scholar
McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. P. (2009). Self-explanation and metacognition: The dynamics of reading. In Hacker, J. D., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (Eds.), Handbook of Metacognition in Education (pp. 60–81). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Oakhill, J., Yuill, N., & Donaldson, M. (1990). Understanding of causal expressions in skilled and less skilled text comprehenders. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 8, 401–410. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-835X.1990.tb00854.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OECD (2009). PISA 2009: Assessment Framework Key Competencies in Reading, Mathematics and Science. Paris, France: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
O’Reilly, T., Best, R., & McNamara, D. S. (2004). Self-explanation reading training: Effects for low-knowledge readers. In Forbus, K., Gentner, D., & Regier, T. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1053–1058). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Otero, J. (2002). Noticing and fixing difficulties in understanding science texts. In Otero, J., León, J. A., & Graesser, A. (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 281–307). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Ozuru, Y., Best, R., & McNamara, D. S. (2004). Contribution of reading skill to learning from expository texts. In Forbus, K., Gentner, D., & Regier, T. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1071–1076). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Rouet, J. F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubman, C., & Waters, H. (2000) A, B Seeing: The role of constructive processes in children’s comprehension monitoring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 503–514. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.3.503 Google Scholar
van den Broek, P., Risdem, K., & Husebye-Hatmann, E. (1995). The role of readers’ standard for coherence in the generation of inferences during reading. In Lorch, R. F. & O’Brien, E. J. (Eds.), Sources of coherence in text comprehension (pp. 353–373). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Vidal-Abarca, E., Gilabert, R., Martínez, T., Sellés, P., Abad, N., & Ferrer, C. (2007) TEC. Test de Estrategias de Comprensión. Madrid, Spain: ICCE.Google 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0020062 Google Scholar
Vidal-Abarca, E., Martinez, T., Salmerón, L., Cerdán, R., Gilabert, R., Gil, L.,… Ferris, R. (2011). Recording online processes in task-oriented reading with Read&Answer. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers. 43, 179–192. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-010-0032-1 Google Scholar