Situation-model representations of conflicting textual information in L2 readers: the effects of prior beliefs and L2 proficiency

IF 1.5 2区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Language Awareness Pub Date : 2022-06-29 DOI:10.1080/09658416.2022.2091583
M. Karimi, Parisa Ashkani
{"title":"Situation-model representations of conflicting textual information in L2 readers: the effects of prior beliefs and L2 proficiency","authors":"M. Karimi, Parisa Ashkani","doi":"10.1080/09658416.2022.2091583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In a knowledge society characterized by an abundance of information sources that present conflicting perspectives on socio-scientific controversies, it is extremely important for readers to construct effective mental models of such controversies. Nevertheless, readers’ mental representations of controversial information are assumed to be biased towards their pre-existing beliefs (text-belief consistency effect). This study extends earlier research on the effect to L2 reading contexts and examines whether L2 readers’ prior beliefs affect their situation-model representations of documents that present opposing standpoints on an established controversy in language education: inductive vs. deductive approaches. Additionally, we examined whether the readers’ strength of situation-model representations is affected by their proficiency level and whether proficiency moderates the effect. Fifty-eight readers read texts that presented conflicting perspectives on the controversy. A recognition task was used to assess the strength of their situation-model representations. The results revealed that readers’ mental representations of the documents were biased towards the perspectives that aligned with their pre-existing beliefs on the controversy. The results further revealed a strong significant effect for L2 proficiency on the strength of the situation-model representations of the texts. However, proficiency failed to moderate the text-belief consistency effect that readers displayed when reading the controversial textual information.","PeriodicalId":46683,"journal":{"name":"Language Awareness","volume":"32 1","pages":"323 - 341"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Awareness","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2022.2091583","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract In a knowledge society characterized by an abundance of information sources that present conflicting perspectives on socio-scientific controversies, it is extremely important for readers to construct effective mental models of such controversies. Nevertheless, readers’ mental representations of controversial information are assumed to be biased towards their pre-existing beliefs (text-belief consistency effect). This study extends earlier research on the effect to L2 reading contexts and examines whether L2 readers’ prior beliefs affect their situation-model representations of documents that present opposing standpoints on an established controversy in language education: inductive vs. deductive approaches. Additionally, we examined whether the readers’ strength of situation-model representations is affected by their proficiency level and whether proficiency moderates the effect. Fifty-eight readers read texts that presented conflicting perspectives on the controversy. A recognition task was used to assess the strength of their situation-model representations. The results revealed that readers’ mental representations of the documents were biased towards the perspectives that aligned with their pre-existing beliefs on the controversy. The results further revealed a strong significant effect for L2 proficiency on the strength of the situation-model representations of the texts. However, proficiency failed to moderate the text-belief consistency effect that readers displayed when reading the controversial textual information.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
二语读者冲突语篇信息的情景模型表征:先验信念与二语水平的影响
在知识社会中,信息来源丰富,对社会科学争议提出了相互矛盾的观点,对读者来说,构建有效的这种争议的心理模型是极其重要的。然而,读者对有争议信息的心理表征被认为是偏向于他们已有的信念(文本信念一致性效应)。本研究将先前关于二语阅读语境影响的研究扩展到二语阅读语境,并探讨了二语读者的先验信念是否会影响他们对在语言教育中一个既定争议中呈现对立立场的文件的情境模型表征:归纳与演绎方法。此外,我们还考察了读者情境模型表征的强度是否受到其熟练程度的影响,以及熟练程度是否调节了这种影响。58名读者阅读了对这一争议提出不同观点的文章。一个识别任务被用来评估他们的情境模型表征的强度。结果显示,读者对文件的心理表征偏向于与他们先前对争议的看法一致的观点。结果进一步揭示了二语熟练程度对文本情境模型表征强度的强烈显著影响。然而,熟练程度并不能调节读者在阅读争议文本信息时所表现出的文本信念一致性效应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Language Awareness
Language Awareness Multiple-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Language Awareness encourages and disseminates work which explores the following: the role of explicit knowledge about language in the process of language learning; the role that such explicit knowledge about language plays in language teaching and how such knowledge can best be mediated by teachers; the role of explicit knowledge about language in language use: e.g. sensitivity to bias in language, manipulative aspects of language, literary use of language. It is also a goal of Language Awareness to encourage the establishment of bridges between the language sciences and other disciplines within or outside educational contexts.
期刊最新文献
Affordances in the international service-learning context for Spanish learners Content knowledge for language teaching: dialectical materialist stance on developing teacher language awareness Accommodating beginner language learners in level-based language introduction Developing an MLA-test for young learners – insights from measurement theory and language testing Fostering language awareness for integration through teacher-researcher collaboration in a Spanish bilingual education context
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1