Ambivalent-profile students undervalued visual information and rigidly applied print-reading strategies, undermining their OMR comprehension¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Interviewed ambivalent-profile students treated images as secondary aids rather than integral to comprehension. → Zhu 2026 q2 i? When print strategies failed in OMR, these students did not adapt reflectively but maintained overconfidence that OMR is no different from print reading. → Zhu 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

Zhu 2026¶

Zhu, S., Yao, Y., Cheong, C. M., & Zhu, X. (2026). Latent motivational-emotional profiles and their effects on strategy use and performance in online multimodal reading tasks: A mixed-methods investigation. Learning and Instruction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2026.102386

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Qualitative content analysis of semi-structured group interviews with 27 selected students (13 boys, 14 girls) representing the three profiles; students reported glancing at images and believing the knowledge resides in the text.

"G3 students consistently undervalued visual information, viewing images as secondary aids rather than integral to comprehension."

Zhu 2026 (2)¶

Zhu, S., Yao, Y., Cheong, C. M., & Zhu, X. (2026). Latent motivational-emotional profiles and their effects on strategy use and performance in online multimodal reading tasks: A mixed-methods investigation. Learning and Instruction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2026.102386

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Same interview analysis: conceptual rigidity combined with overconfidence hindered adjustment to multimodal reading demands, limiting comprehension and strategic flexibility despite frequent strategy use.

"when students discovered that print reading strategies, such as locating topic sentences, could not fully apply to OMR texts, they did not adapt reflectively. Instead, they maintained overconfidence, insisting that "OMR is no different from print reading.""

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The ambivalent profile reported the highest OMR strategy use but achieved the lowest OMR performance, while the positive profile scored highest — related
• The disorientation strategy negatively predicted OMR performance in the moderate and ambivalent profiles but not in the positive profile — related
• Hong Kong fourth graders' OMR self-efficacy and emotions form three distinct motivational-emotional profiles: positive, moderate, and ambivalent — related
• Strategy effectiveness varied across profiles: main idea selection helped only the ambivalent group and trial-and-error helped only the moderate group — related