Abstract
The purpose of this study was to test the relationships between critical thinking, prior topic knowledge and beliefs, and multiple-document comprehension through a path analysis approach. The participants were 281 Italian undergraduate students. Participants first completed a rational-experiential inventory, a critical thinking skills test, a prior topic knowledge test, and a prior topic beliefs test. Then, they were asked to read six documents on the topic of flu vaccination. After reading the texts, students were asked to write an argumentative essay on the topic as a measure of multiple-document comprehension. The hypothesized model fit the data well. Results confirmed that argumentation quality after reading six documents with different perspectives on the topic is associated with different critical thinking skills in stronger- versus weaker-belief readers. In weaker-belief readers, multiple-document comprehension was associated with deduction skills, whereas in stronger-belief readers, multiple-document comprehension was associated with hypothesis-testing skills. Both theoretical and educational implications of the results are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M. A., Tamim, R., & Zhang, D. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 1102–1134. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308326084.
Alexander, P. A., & DRLRL. (2012). Reading into the future: competence for the 21st century. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 259–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.722511.
Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Instructional effects on critical thinking: Performance on ill-defined issues. Learning and Instruction, 19(4), 322–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.06.010.
Bailin, S. (2002). Critical thinking and science education. Science and Education, 11(4), 361–375. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016042608.
Braasch, J. L. G., Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Anmarkrud, Ø. (2014). Incremental theories of intelligence predict multiple document comprehension. Learning and Individual Differences, 31, 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LINDIF.2013.12.012.
Braasch, J. L. G., McCabe, R. M., & Daniel, F. (2016). Content integration across multiple documents reduces memory for sources. Reading and Writing, 29(8), 1571–1598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9609-5.
Bråten, I., Britt, M. A., Strømsø, H. I., & Rouet, J.-F. (2011a). The role of epistemic beliefs in the comprehension of multiple expository texts: Toward an integrated model. Educational Psychologist, 46(1), 48–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.538647.
Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Salmerón, L. (2011b). Trust and mistrust when students read multiple information sources about climate change. Learning and Instruction, 21(2), 180–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.02.002.
Bråten, I., Ferguson, L. E., Anmarkrud, Ø., & Strømsø, H. I. (2013a). Prediction of learning and comprehension when adolescents read multiple texts: the roles of word-level processing, strategic approach, and reading motivation. Reading and Writing, 26(3), 321–348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-012-9371-x.
Bråten, I., Ferguson, L. E., Strømsø, H. I., & Anmarkrud, Ø. (2013b). Justification beliefs and multiple-documents comprehension. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28(3), 879–902. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-012-0145-2.
Bråten, I., Anmarkrud, Ø., Brandmo, C., & Strømsø, H. I. (2014a). Developing and testing a model of direct and indirect relationships between individual differences, processing, and multiple-text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 30, 9–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.11.002.
Bråten, I., Ferguson, L. E., Strømsø, H. I., & Anmarkrud, Ø. (2014b). Students working with multiple conflicting documents on a scientific issue: relations between epistemic cognition while reading and sourcing and argumentation in essays. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(1), 58–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12005.
Britt, M. A., & Rouet, J.-F. (2012). Learning with multiple documents: component skills and their acquisition. In J. R. Kirby & M. J. Lawson (Eds.), Enhancing the quality of learning: Dispositions, instruction, and learning processes (pp. 276–314). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Britt, M. A., Perfetti, C. A., Sandak, R., & Rouet, J.-F. (1999). Content integration and source separation in learning from multiple texts. In S. R. Goldman, A. C. Graesser, & P. van den Broek (Eds.), Narrative, comprehension, causality, and coherence: Essays in honor of Tom Trabasso (pp. 209–233). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116–131.
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: the life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 197–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.197.
Dai, D. Y., & Wang, X. (2007). The role of need for cognition and reader beliefs in text comprehension and interest development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), 332–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.05.002.
Ennis, R. H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specificity: clarification and needed research. Educational Researcher, 18(3), 4–10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018003004.
Ennis, R. H. (1993). Critical thinking assessment. Theory into Practice, 32(3), 179–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849309543594.
Epstein, S., Pacini, R., Denes-Raj, V., & Heier, H. (1996). Individual differences in intuitive–experiential and analytical–rational thinking styles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 390–405. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.390.
Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: a statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Research findings and recommendations. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED315423. Accessed 5 Feb 2016.
Facione, P. A. (2000). The disposition toward critical thinking: its character, measurement, and relationship to critical thinking skill. Informal Logic, 20, 61–84. https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v20i1.2254.
Hair, J. F., Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis (6th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Halpern, D. F. (1999). Teaching for critical thinking: helping college students develop the skills and dispositions of a critical thinker. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 80(80), 69–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.8005.
Halpern, D. F. (2014). Thought and knowledge: an introduction to critical thinking (5th ed.). New York: Psychology Press.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.
Jucks, R., & Paus, E. (2012). Different words for the same concept: learning collaboratively from multiple documents. Cognition and Instruction, 31(2), 227–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2013.769993.
Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research. Forth Worth: Harcourt.
Kettler, T. (2014). Critical thinking skills among elementary school students: comparing identified gifted and general education student performance. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58(2), 127–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986214522508.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: a paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ku, K. Y. L. (2009). Assessing students’ critical thinking performance: urging for measurements using multi-response format. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4(1), 70–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2009.02.001.
Kuhn, D. (2010). What is scientific thinking and how does it develop? In U. Goswami (Ed.), Handbook of Childhood Cognitive Development (pp. 1–23). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Lawson, A. E., Clak, B., Cramer-Meldrum, E., Falconer, K. A., Sequist, J. M., & Kwon, Y. (2000). Development of scientific reasoning in college biology: do two levels of general hypothesis-testing skills exist? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(1), 81–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200001)37:1<81::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-I.
Li, M., Murphy, P. K., Wang, J., Mason, L. H., Firetto, C. M., Wei, L., & Chung, K. S. (2016). Promoting reading comprehension and critical-analytic thinking: a comparison of three approaches with fourth and fifth graders. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 46, 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.05.002.
Lucisano, P., & Piemontese, M. E. (1988). GULPEASE: una formula per la predizione della difficoltà dei testi in lingua italiana ( en. tr. GULPEASE: a formula to predict the difficulty of texts in Italian). Scuola e Città, 3, 110–124.
Macpherson, R., & Stanovich, K. E. (2007). Cognitive ability, thinking dispositions, and instructional set as predictors of critical thinking. Learning and Individual Differences, 17(2), 115–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2007.05.003.
Maier, J., & Richter, T. (2012). Text belief consistency effects in the comprehension of multiple texts with conflicting information. Cognition and Instruction, 31(2), 151–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2013.769997.
Maier, J., & Richter, T. (2014). Fostering multiple text comprehension: How metacognitive strategies and motivation moderate the text-belief consistency effect. Metacognition and Learning, 9(1), 51–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-013-9111-x.
Maier, J., & Richter, T. (2016). Effects of text-belief consistency and reading task on the strategic validation of multiple texts. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 31(4), 479–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-015-0270-9.
Mason, L., Boldrin, A., & Ariasi, N. (2010). Searching the Web to learn about a controversial topic: Are students epistemically active? Instructional Science, 38, 607–633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9089-y.
Mason, L., Ariasi, N., & Boldrin, A. (2011). Epistemic beliefs in action: Spontaneous reflections about knowledge and knowing during online information searching and their influence on learning. Learning and Instruction, 21, 137–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.01.001.
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.03.016.
Mason, L., Scrimin, S., Tornatora, M. C., & Zaccoletti, S. (2017). Emotional reactivity and comprehension of multiple online texts. Learning and Individual Differences, 58, 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LINDIF.2017.07.002.
McCrudden, M. T., & Barnes, A. (2016). Differences in student reasoning about belief-relevant arguments: a mixed methods study. Metacognition and Learning, 11(3), 275–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-015-9148-0.
McCrudden, M. T., & Sparks, P. C. (2014). Exploring the effect of task instructions on topic beliefs and topic belief justifications: a mixed methods study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEDPSYCH.2013.10.001.
McPeck, H. (1981). Critical thinking and education. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
McPeck, H. (1985). Response to H. Siegel (pp. 73-77). In Philosophy of education 1985: proceedings of the forty-first annual meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society. Normal: Philosophy of Education Society.
Millman, J., Tomko, T. N., & Ennis, R. H. (2005). Cornell Critical Thinking Tests Levels X & Z. Seaside: Critical Thinking Company.
Muthen, B., & Muthen, L. (2002). MPlus: the comprehensive modeling program for applied researchers. Los Angeles: Muthen & Muthen.
National Assessment Governing Board (2013). The nation’s report card: a first look: 2013 mathematics and reading (NCES 2014-451). Washington, DC. https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/main2013/pdf/2014451.pdf. Accessed 1 May 2019
Paul, R. (1991). Teaching critical thinking in the “strong sense”: A focus on selfdeception, world views and dialectical mode of analysis. Informal Logic, 4(2), 2–7.
Paul, R. (1993). Critical thinking: what every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing world. Santa Rosa: Foundation for Critical Thinking.
Perfetti, C. A., Rouet, J.-F., & Britt, M. A. (1999). Toward a theory of documents representation. In H. Van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representation during reading (pp. 99–122). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Reznitskaya, A., Kuo, L., Glina, M., & Anderson, R. C. (2009). Measuring argumentative reasoning: what’s behind the numbers? Learning and Individual Differences, 19(2), 219–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LINDIF.2008.11.001.
Richter, T., & Maier, J. (2017). Comprehension of multiple documents with conflicting information: a two-step model of validation. Educational Psychologist, 52(3), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1322968.
Rouet, J.-F., & Britt, M. A. (2011). Relevance processes in multiple documents comprehension. In J. P. Magliano & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 19–52). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Shiloh, S., Salton, E., & Sharabi, D. (2002). Individual differences in rational and intuitive thinking styles as predictors of heuristic responses and framing effects. Personality and Individual Differences, 32(3), 415–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00034-4.
Siegel, H. (1988). Educating reason: rationality, critical thinking and education. New York: Routledge.
Strømsø, H. I., Bråten, I., & Britt, M. A. (2010). Reading multiple texts about climate change: the relationship between memory for sources and text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 20(3), 192–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.001.
Wiley, J. (2005). A fair and balanced look at the news: what affects memory for controversial arguments? Journal of Memory and Language, 53(1), 95–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.02.001.
Wineburg, S. (1991). Historical problem solving: a study of the cognitive processes used in the evaluation of documentary and pictorial evidence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.83.1.73.
World Medical Association. (2013). Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA, 27, 2191–2194. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053.
Yang, F. Y. (2004). Exploring high school students’ use of theory and evidence in an everyday context: the role of scientific thinking in environmental science decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 26(11), 1345–1364. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000205404.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Christian Tarchi. Department of Education, Languages, Intercultures, Literatures and Psychology, University of Florence (Italy), via San Salvi, 12 - 50125 Florence, Italy. email: christian.tarchi@unifi.it
Current themes of research:
Comprehension. Critical thinking. Reading and spelling acquisition. Learning disorders. Conceptualization of Physics. Intercultural sensitivity.
Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:
Pinto, G., Tarchi, C. & Bigozzi, L. (2019). Promoting narrative competence in kindergarten: An intervention study. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 47, 20-29. DOI: 1016/j.ecresq.2018.09.003
Tarchi, C., Surian, A. & Daiute, C. (2019). Assessing study abroad students’ intercultural sensitivity with narratives. European Journal of Psychology of Education. DOI: 10.1007/s10212-019-00417-9
Pinto, G., Bigozzi, L., Tarchi, C., & Camilloni, M. (2018). Improving conceptual knowledge of the Italian writing system in kindergarten: a cluster randomized trial Frontiers in Psychology, 9:1396. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01396
Tarchi, C. (2017). Comprehending expository texts: the role of cognitive and motivational factors. Reading Psychology, 38, 154-181. DOI: 10.1080/02702711.2016.1245229.
Pinto, G., Bigozzi, L., Tarchi, C. & Vezzani, C. (2017). Emergent literacy and reading acquisition: a longitudinal study from kindergarten to primary school. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 32(4), 571-587. DOI: 10.1007/s10212-016-0314-9
Pinto, G., Tarchi, C., & Bigozzi, L. (2015). Development in Narrative Competences from Oral to Written Stories in Five- to Seven-year-old Children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.12.001
Bigozzi, L., Tarchi, C., Pinto, G. & Accorti Gamannossi, B. (2015). Predicting dyslexia in a transparent orthography from grade-one literacy skills: a prospective cohort study. Reading & Writing Quarterly. DOI:10.1080/10573569.2014.988310
Pinto, G., Tarchi, C., & Bigozzi, L. (2015). The relationship between oral and written narratives: A three-year longitudinal study of narrative cohesion, coherence, and structure. British Journal of Educational Psychology. DOI:10.1111/bjep.12091
Pinto, G., Bigozzi, L., Tarchi, C., Accorti Gamannossi, B. & Canneti, L. (2015). Cross-lag analysis of longitudinal associations between primary school students’ writing and reading skills. Reading and Writing. DOI: 10.1007/s11145-015-9569-9
Tarchi, C. (2015). Fostering reading comprehension of expository texts through the activation of readers' prior knowledge and inference-making skills. International Journal of Educational Research. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijer.2015.04.013
Lucia Mason. Department of Developmental Psychology and Socialization, University of Padova (Italy), via Venezia, 8 - 35131 Padova, Italy. Email: lucia.mason@unipd.it.
Current themes of research:
Cognitive and emotional individual differences in source evaluation skills when searching the Web for information on controversial topics and in comprehension of multiple digital texts. Interplay of text and reader characteristics in knowledge revision processes as well as in multimedia learning.
Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:
Mason, L. (2018). Multiplicity in the digital era: Processing and learning from multiple sources and modalities of instructional presentations. Learning and Instruction, 57, 66-81. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.03.004
Scrimin, S., Moscardino, U., & Mason, L. (2018). First graders’ allocation of attentional resources in an emotional stroop task: The role of heart period variability and classroom climate. British Journal of Educational Psychology. Advance online publication. doi:10.1111/bjep.12228
Mason, L., & Florit, E. (2018). Complementary methods for assessing online processing of multiple sources. In J. L. G. Braasch, I. Bråten, & M. T. McCrudden (Eds.), Handbook of multiple source use (pp. 425-446). New York: Routledge.
Mason, L., Baldi, R., Di Ronco, S., Scrimin, S., Danielson, R. W., & Sinatra, G. M. (2017). Refutation text and graphics: Effects on conceptual change learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 49, 275-288. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.03.007
Mason, L., Scrimin, S., Tornatora, M. C., & Zaccoletti, S. (2017). Emotional reactivity and comprehension of multiple online texts. Learning and Individual Differences, 58, 10-21. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2017.07.002
Mason, L. (2016). Psychological perspectives on measuring epistemic cognition. In A. Greene, W. A., Sandoval, & I. Bråten (Eds.) Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 375-392). New York: Routledge.
Mason, L., & Tornatora, M. C. (2016). Analogical encoding with and without instructions for case comparison of scientific phenomena. Educational Psychology, 36(2), 391-412.
doi:10.1080/01443410.2014.953038
Mason, L., Pluchino, P., & Tornatora, M. C. (2015). Eye-movement modeling of text and picture integration during reading: effects on processing and learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 41, 172-187. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.01.004
Scrimin, S., Moscardino, U., & Mason, L. (2014). School-related stress and cognitive performance: A mood-induction study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39, 358-369. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.09.0020361-476X
Mason, L., Lowe, R., & Tornatora M. C. (2013). Self-generated drawings for supporting comprehension of a complex animation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38(3), 211-224.doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2013.04.001
Electronic supplementary material
ESM 1
(DOCX 19 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tarchi, C., Mason, L. Effects of critical thinking on multiple-document comprehension. Eur J Psychol Educ 35, 289–313 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-019-00426-8
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-019-00426-8