阅读提示和阅读后生成学习任务对多文献整合的影响:来自概念网络分析的证据

Ziqian Wei, Yishan Zhang, Roy B. Clariana, Xuqian Chen
{"title":"阅读提示和阅读后生成学习任务对多文献整合的影响:来自概念网络分析的证据","authors":"Ziqian Wei, Yishan Zhang, Roy B. Clariana, Xuqian Chen","doi":"10.1007/s11423-023-10326-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Learning from multiple documents is an essential ability in today’s society. This experimental study used concept network analysis to consider how reading prompts and post-reading generative learning tasks can alter students’ documents integration performance. Undergraduates (<i>N</i> = 119) read three documents about Alzheimer’s disease with one of two reading prompts (integrative prompts vs. detailed prompts) and then after reading completed a generative learning task (concept mapping vs. summary writing). Three days later they completed a delayed writing task and an inference verification test. Participants’ written texts were converted to concept networks to evaluate conceptual level integration, including the <i>quantity</i> of integration (measured by the proportion of integrative links), the <i>semantic quality</i> of integration (measured by the similarity of integrative links), and the <i>structural quality</i> of integration (measured by comparing network graph centrality). Results showed that the integrative prompts relative to the detailed prompts enhanced the quantity of integration but not the semantic and structural quality. Further, concept mapping relative to summary writing significantly improved the structural quality of integration. In summary, this study describes a new concept network approach for measuring different aspects of integration to advance theory and research in multiple document comprehension.</p>","PeriodicalId":501584,"journal":{"name":"Educational Technology Research and Development","volume":"287 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effects of reading prompts and of post-reading generative learning tasks on multiple document integration: evidence from concept network analysis\",\"authors\":\"Ziqian Wei, Yishan Zhang, Roy B. Clariana, Xuqian Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11423-023-10326-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Learning from multiple documents is an essential ability in today’s society. This experimental study used concept network analysis to consider how reading prompts and post-reading generative learning tasks can alter students’ documents integration performance. Undergraduates (<i>N</i> = 119) read three documents about Alzheimer’s disease with one of two reading prompts (integrative prompts vs. detailed prompts) and then after reading completed a generative learning task (concept mapping vs. summary writing). Three days later they completed a delayed writing task and an inference verification test. Participants’ written texts were converted to concept networks to evaluate conceptual level integration, including the <i>quantity</i> of integration (measured by the proportion of integrative links), the <i>semantic quality</i> of integration (measured by the similarity of integrative links), and the <i>structural quality</i> of integration (measured by comparing network graph centrality). Results showed that the integrative prompts relative to the detailed prompts enhanced the quantity of integration but not the semantic and structural quality. Further, concept mapping relative to summary writing significantly improved the structural quality of integration. In summary, this study describes a new concept network approach for measuring different aspects of integration to advance theory and research in multiple document comprehension.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Technology Research and Development\",\"volume\":\"287 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Technology Research and Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10326-w\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Technology Research and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10326-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在当今社会,从多种文献中学习是一种必不可少的能力。本实验研究采用概念网络分析来探讨阅读提示和阅读后生成学习任务如何改变学生的文献整合表现。本科生(N = 119)阅读了三篇关于阿尔茨海默病的文献,并在两种阅读提示(综合提示vs详细提示)中选择一种,然后在阅读后完成生成学习任务(概念映射vs摘要写作)。三天后,他们完成了一个延迟的写作任务和一个推理验证测试。将参与者的书面文本转换为概念网络,以评估概念层面的整合,包括整合数量(以整合链接的比例衡量)、整合的语义质量(以整合链接的相似性衡量)和整合的结构质量(通过比较网络图中心性衡量)。结果表明,综合提示相对于详细提示提高了整合的数量,但没有提高语义和结构质量。此外,与摘要写作相关的概念映射显著提高了集成的结构质量。综上所述,本研究描述了一种新的概念网络方法来测量整合的不同方面,以推进多文献理解的理论和研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
The effects of reading prompts and of post-reading generative learning tasks on multiple document integration: evidence from concept network analysis

Learning from multiple documents is an essential ability in today’s society. This experimental study used concept network analysis to consider how reading prompts and post-reading generative learning tasks can alter students’ documents integration performance. Undergraduates (N = 119) read three documents about Alzheimer’s disease with one of two reading prompts (integrative prompts vs. detailed prompts) and then after reading completed a generative learning task (concept mapping vs. summary writing). Three days later they completed a delayed writing task and an inference verification test. Participants’ written texts were converted to concept networks to evaluate conceptual level integration, including the quantity of integration (measured by the proportion of integrative links), the semantic quality of integration (measured by the similarity of integrative links), and the structural quality of integration (measured by comparing network graph centrality). Results showed that the integrative prompts relative to the detailed prompts enhanced the quantity of integration but not the semantic and structural quality. Further, concept mapping relative to summary writing significantly improved the structural quality of integration. In summary, this study describes a new concept network approach for measuring different aspects of integration to advance theory and research in multiple document comprehension.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The effect of combining emphasis manipulation and simplifying conditions sequencing method in gaining expertise while utilizing whole task sequencing Education and technology: elements of a relevant, comprehensive, and cumulative research agenda Analyzing the impact of basic psychological needs on student academic performance: a comparison of post-pandemic interactive synchronous hyflex and pre-pandemic traditional face-to-face instruction Evidence-based development of an instrument for the assessment of teachers’ self-perceptions of their artificial intelligence competence DUDA: a digital didactic learning unit based on educational escape rooms and multisensory learning activities for primary school children during COVID-19 lockdown
×
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