Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Students’ consideration of source information during the reading of multiple texts and its effect on intertextual conflict resolution

  • Published:
Instructional Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigated students’ spontaneous use of source information for the resolution of conflicts between texts. One-hundred fifty-four undergraduate students read two conflicting explanations concerning the relationship between blood type and personality under two conditions: either one explanation with a higher credibility source and the opposite explanation with a lower credibility source or the same two explanations but with the sources interchanged. Afterwards, students wrote their opinions about the controversial issue. In their opinion essays, students were more likely to resolve the conflicts between the two explanations by affirming the one from the higher credible source and/or negating the opposite one from the lower credible source, though source manipulation had a small and partial effect on intertextual conflict resolution compared with the perceived quality of each explanation and prior attitudes. However, students’ attention to source information during reading and their use of the information for justifying their intertextual conflict resolution were limited. These results suggest that undergraduate students are capable of, but not good at, using source information for intertextual conflict resolution.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Afflerbach, P., & Cho, B. (2010). Determining and describing reading strategies: Internet and traditional forms of reading. In H. S. Waters & W. Schneider (Eds.), Metacognition, strategy use, and instruction (pp. 201–225). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates, B. R., Romina, S., Ahmed, R., & Hopson, D. (2006). The effect of source credibility on consumers’ perceptions of the quality of health information on the Internet. Medical Informatics and the Internet in Medicine, 31, 45–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman, C. (1985). Physicists reading physics: Schema-laden purposes and purpose-laden schema. Written Communication, 2, 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordia, P., DiFonzo, N., Haines, R., & Chaseling, E. (2005). Rumors denials as persuasive messages: Effects of personal relevance, source, and message characteristics. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35, 1301–1331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2006). Effects of personal epistemology on the understanding of multiple texts. Reading Psychology, 27, 457–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Britt, M. A. (2009). Trust matters: Examining the role of source evaluation in students’ construction of meaning within and across multiple texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 44, 6–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Salmerón, L. (2011). Trust and mistrust when students read multiple information sources about climate change. Learning and Instruction, 21, 180–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Britt, M. A., & Aglinskas, C. (2002). Improving students’ ability to identify and use source information. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 485–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Britt, M. A., & Sommer, J. (2004). Facilitating textual integration with macro-structure focusing tasks. Reading Psychology, 25, 313–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caverly, D. C., Orlando, V. P., & Mullen, J.-A. L. (2000). Textbook study reading. In R. F. Flippo & D. C. Caverly (Eds.), Handbook of college reading and study strategy research (pp. 105–147). Hillsdale, 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaiken, S., & Maheswaran, D. (1994). Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 460–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chebat, J. C., Filiatrault, P., Laroche, M., & Watson, C. (1988). Compensatory effects of cognitive characteristics of the source, the message, and the receiver upon attitude change. Journal of Psychology, 122, 609–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cramer, K. M., & Imaike, E. (2002). Personality, blood type, and the five-factor model. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 621–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M., Coleman, P. T., & Marcus, E. C. (Eds.). (2006). The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fujita, K. (2006). Parasaito-shiki ketsuekigata-shindan [Parasitological blood type analysis]. Tokyo: Shinchosha.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furnham, A., & Schofield, S. (1987). Accepting personality test feedback: A review of the Barnum effect. Current Psychology, 6, 162–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geisler, C. (1994). Academic literacy and the nature of expertise: Reading, writing, and knowing in academic philosophy. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, T., Schwarz, B. B., & Porat, D. (2008). Living and dormant collective memories as contexts of history learning. Learning and Instruction, 18, 223–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., Wiley, J., Goldman, S. R., O’Reilly, T., Jeon, M., & McDaniel, B. (2007). SEEK Web tutor: Fostering a critical stance while exploring the causes of volcanic eruption. Metacognition Learning, 2, 89–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harmon, R. R., & Coney, K. A. (1982). The persuasive effects of source credibility in buy and lease situations. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 255–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hidi, S., & Klaiman, R. (1983). Notetaking by experts and novices: An attempt to identify teachable strategies. Curriculum Inquiry, 13, 377–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homer, P. M., & Kahle, L. R. (1990). Source expertise, time of source identification, and involvement in persuasion: An elaborative processing perspective. Journal of Advertising, 19, 30–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hynd, C. R. (1999). Teaching students to think critically using multiple texts in history. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 42, 428–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iding, M. K., Crosby, M. E., Auernheimer, B., & Klemm, E. B. (2009). Web site credibility: Why do people believe what they believe? Instructional Science, 37, 43–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Itou, T. (1994). Ketsueki-gata-seikaku-handan to shinjiru kokoro [Blood type personality tests and credulous mind]. L’esprit D’aujourd’hui, 324, 106–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kienhues, D., Stadtler, M., & Bromme, R. (2011). Dealing with conflicting or consistent medical information on the web: When expert information breeds laypersons’ doubts about experts. Learning and Instruction, 21, 193–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1994). Text comprehension, memory, and learning. American Psychologist, 49, 294–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobayashi, K. (2005). What limits the encoding effect of note-taking? A meta-analytic examination. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 242–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobayashi, K. (2006). Combined effects of note-taking/-reviewing on learning and the enhancement through interventions: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychology, 26, 459–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobayashi, K. (2007). The influence of critical reading orientation on external strategy use during expository text reading. Educational Psychology, 27, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobayashi, K. (2009). The influence of topic knowledge, external strategy use, and college experience on students’ comprehension of controversial texts. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 130–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobayashi, K. (2010). Strategic use of multiple texts for the evaluation of arguments. Reading Psychology, 31, 121–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nan, X. (2009). The influence of source credibility on attitude certainty: Exploring the moderating effects of timing of source identification and individual need for cognition. Psychology & Marketing, 26, 321–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nokes, J. D., Dole, J. A., & Hacker, D. J. (2007). Teaching high school students to use heuristics while reading historical texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 492–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, E. M., & Schraw, G. (2007). Promoting argument–counterargument integration in students’ writing. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76, 59–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Keefe, D. J. (2002). Persuasion: Theory and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perfetti, C. A., Britt, M. A., & Georgi, M. C. (1995). Text-based learning and reasoning: Studies in history. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perfetti, C. A., Rouet, J.-F., & Britt, M. C. (1999). Towards a theory of documents representation. In H. van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 99–122). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 847–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pichert, J. W., & Anderson, R. C. (1977). Taking different perspectives on a story. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 309–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rieh, S. Y. (2002). Judgment of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53, 145–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, M., & Glendon, A. I. (2003). Blood type and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 1099–1112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouet, J.-F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouet, J.-F., & Britt, M. A. (2011). Relevance processes in multiple document comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 19–52). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouet, J.-F., Britt, M. A., Mason, R. A., & Perfetti, C. A. (1996). Using multiple sources of evidence to reason about history. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 478–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouet, J.-F., Favart, M., Britt, M. A., & Perfetti, C. A. (1997). Studying and using multiple documents in history: Effects of discipline expertise. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 85–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rukavina, I., & Daneman, M. (1996). Integration and its effect on acquiring knowledge about competing scientific theories from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 272–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stadtler, M., & Bromme, R. (2007). Dealing with multiple documents on the WWW: The role of metacognition in the formation of documents models. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2, 191–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stadtler, M., & Bromme, R. (2008). Effects of the metacognitive computer-tool meta.a.ware on the web search of laypersons. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 716–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, S. A., Hynd, C. R., Britton, B. K., McNish, M. M., & Bosquet, D. (1996). What happens when students read multiple source documents in history? Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 430–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternthal, B., Dholakia, R., & Leavitt, C. (1978). The persuasive effect of source credibility: Tests of cognitive response. Journal of Consumer Research, 4, 252–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 192–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uemura, A., & Sato, T. (2006). Giji-seikaku-riron toshiteno ketuekigata-kanren-setsu no tayousei [Blood-typing as a pseudo-personality theory and diversity of its explanatory styles]. Japanese Journal of Personality, 15, 33–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walraven, A., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Boshuizen, H. P. A. (2008). Information-problem solving: A review of problems students encounter and instructional solutions. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 623–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walton, D. N. (1997). Appeal to expert opinion: Arguments from authority. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wathen, C. N., & Burkell, J. (2002). Believe it or not: Factors influencing credibility on the web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53, 134–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, J., Ash, I. K., Sanchez, C. A., & Jaeger, A. (2011). Relevance processes in multiple document comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 353–374). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, J., Goldman, S. R., Graesser, A. C., Sanchez, C. A., Ash, I. K., & Hemmerich, J. A. (2009). Source evaluation, comprehension, and learning in Internet science inquiry tasks. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 1060–1106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wineburg, S. 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, 73–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wineburg, S. S. (1994). The cognitive representation of historical texts. In G. Leinhardt, I. Beck, & C. Stainton (Eds.), Teaching and learning in history (pp. 85–135). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wineburg, S. S. (1998). Reading Abraham Lincoln: An expert/expert study in the interpretation of historical texts. Cognitive Science, 22, 319–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, M. B. W., & Goldman, S. R. (2005). Relations between adolescents’ text processing and reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 23, 467–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, K., Lindsted, K. D., & Lee, J. W. (2005). Blood type and the five factors of personality in Asia. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 797–808.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, Shizuoka University, Shizuoka, 422-8529, Japan

    Keiichi Kobayashi

Authors
  1. Keiichi Kobayashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Keiichi Kobayashi.

Appendix

Appendix

Set of texts used

Pro-BTP text

You must have at least once come across the theory that blood type is related to personality. According to this theory, each blood type is associated with a unique personality trait. For example, people with blood type A are “methodical” and “sensitive”; those with blood type O are “bighearted” and “easy-going”; those with blood type B are “temperamental” and “go their own way”; and those with blood type AB are “contradictory” and “creative.” Indeed, such a theory has been a matter of controversy for decades, but blood type appears to be related to personality in the light of immunology and infectious disease research.

Immunity refers to the resistance of the body to disease, and its degree is a function of blood type. Take immunity to pneumonia for example. Streptococcus pneumoniae, the cause of pneumonia, contains a large amount of type B substance. For this reason, blood type B individuals, who have no antibodies to counteract the type B substance, have low resistance to Streptococcus pneumoniae, and therefore are more prone to pneumonia. In addition, its symptom is subject to deterioration. In contrast, blood type A individuals do not easily catch pneumonia, because they have antibodies to counteract the type B substance. Taken together with other immunity-related differences among blood types, blood type O individuals have the highest immunity, followed by blood type B, A, and AB individuals, in this order.

Not surprisingly, a person’s health plays a role in shaping his or her personality by influencing his or her human relations and lifestyle. For instance, sick and weak people are more likely to turn introverted, because they miss out on many opportunities for socialization, which would otherwise enable them to gain social experience. Given that the degree of immunity varies according to the blood type, it is highly likely that blood type influences one’s personality.

Statistics show that blood type O individuals, who have the highest immunity, have high resistance to infectious diseases, cancer, pulmonary tuberculosis, and syphilis. This enables them to be active in everything, and consequently, they may be inclined not to care about trivial matters. On the other hand, blood type A individuals are more prone to pulmonary tuberculosis, small pox, diabetes, and myocardial infarction than blood type O individuals. Being methodical and sensitive is advantageous to maintaining a healthy life, insofar as these traits help prevent such diseases. This may be why blood type A individuals are methodical and sensitive.

Of course, blood type is unlikely to entirely determine one’s personality. Nevertheless, one cannot deny the likelihood of blood type having some influence on personality.

Anti-BTP text

Many take the blood type personality theory to be true. To support their conviction, they often cite instances in which their friends and acquaintances really possessed personality characteristics that corresponded with the claims of the blood type personality theory. Presumably this correspondence is a mere illusion, however.

Most of the personality characteristics mentioned in the blood type personality theory apply to the majority of the people to a greater or lesser degree. To illustrate, consider “methodical,” which is often regarded as the personality characteristic of the type A group. It is true that only a minority is methodical in all respects, but on closer inspection everyone will be found to be methodical in at least one aspect, such as taking notes during class, arranging one’s stamp collection, and answering e-mails from one’s friends. If you focus on lecture notes taken by a person of type A who is methodical only while taking notes during class, you will mistakenly regard it as case evidence indicating that individuals falling under the type A group are methodical. As such, the blood type personality theory makes people convince themselves that one’s personality characteristics accord with the theory’s claims, because to some extent, most of the characteristics are true of anyone. An illusion of this type is called the Barnum effect.

Another thing that might cause people to believe that their illusion regarding the blood type personality theory is real may be the mechanisms within our minds that allow us to perceive what we wish to perceive. Human beings have what is called a confirmation bias, that is, a tendency to detect and remember what is consistent with their beliefs and miss and forget belief-inconsistent aspects. To illustrate, reconsider “methodical.” With the confirmation bias, people may focus on lecture notes taken by a person of blood type A and relates their observations to his or her blood type, but overlook the fact that the same person is unpunctual. Given that they confine their observations to what affirms the blood type personality theory, it is unsurprising that blood type personality appears to be valid.

The relationship between blood type and personality mediated by the Barnum effect and the confirmation bias does not imply causality. You should consider this possibility before you hastily and blindly take the blood type personality theory to be true.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kobayashi, K. Students’ consideration of source information during the reading of multiple texts and its effect on intertextual conflict resolution. Instr Sci 42, 183–205 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-013-9276-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-013-9276-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation