External validity of the special-issue strategy measures was mixed: low-to-moderate comprehension correlations for Bräten and Strømsø and Magliano et al., indeterminate for Schellings and Winne and Muis¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2011 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2014: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Bräten and Strømsø (this issue) obtained rather low correlations of strategy use with text comprehension, although correlations were significant for intertextual comprehension, and cross-text elaboration's contribution to the regression equation was not significant. → Marcel V. J. Veenman 2011

Evidence¶

Marcel V. J. Veenman 2011¶

Marcel V. J. Veenman. (2011). Alternative assessment of strategy use with self-report instruments: a discussion. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-011-9080-x

q2 · i? · theoretical · r3

External-validity discussion of a questionnaire study assessing shallow information accumulation versus cross-text inferences. The article adds that regression with accumulation and cross-text elaboration as predictors did not account for variance beyond that of individual predictors.

"Bräten and Strømsø (this issue) obtained rather low correlations of strategy use with text comprehension, although correlations were significant for intertextual comprehension"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Cromley and Azevedo's prompted strategy-use measure correlated .23–.74 with other measures and accounted for about 30% of comprehension variance on average — related
• Within-method convergence (RSAT coding vs human coding; G vs d') indicates stability, not construct validity — related
• Schellings' questionnaire-thinking-aloud convergent correlation of .51 rests on a small sample and is questionable against other studies — related
• Self-reported accumulation negatively predicts intertextual comprehension while cross-text elaboration positively predicts it, after controlling for prior knowledge
• External strategy use affects comprehension of relations among controversial texts, according to the article's title statement — related
• Self-reported multiple-text strategies did not predict intratextual comprehension, where prior knowledge was the unique predictor — related
• Off-line self-report instruments show low concurrent validity with on-line measures and do not predict learning outcomes very well — related
• Calibration (judgment accuracy) measures such as the Goodman-Kruskall gamma coefficient and signal detection theory's d' can be empirically compared, and calibration may vary across knowledge domains — related
• Questionnaire data may capture learners' perceptions rather than the strategies they actually performed — a broader claim this one bears on
• Low questionnaire–think-aloud correlations may have two alternative explanations besides poor self-report ability: the methods may measure different strategies or be aimed at different tasks — related
• Accumulation and cross-text elaboration are uncorrelated and show opposite-sign correlations with intertextual comprehension — related
• Metacognition and comprehension strategy use are weakly to moderately associated with intertextual integration among K-12 students — related