Task instruction significantly affected verbalized local-level selection reasons, with the linguistic task yielding more matching verbalizations than the other two tasks¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? A chi-square test showed a significant relation between selection task and verbalization at the local task level (X2(df=2)=9.17, p<.025), with the linguistic task producing relatively more matching verbalizations than the educational and personal tasks. → Gonny L. M. Schellings & Hein Broekkamp 2011

Evidence¶

Gonny L. M. Schellings & Hein Broekkamp 2011¶

Gonny L. M. Schellings & Hein Broekkamp. (2011). Signaling task awareness in think-aloud protocols from students selecting relevant information from text. Metacognition and Learning 6:65–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-010-9067-z

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Chi-square analysis of 72 definite selection reasons coded across the 36 think-aloud protocols (12 per task). The test of task by match/mismatch of verbalization was significant at the local task level; no effect size is printed.

"There was a significant relation between task and verbalization at the local task level ( X2(df=2)=9.17 p<.025), implying that the linguistic task resulted in relatively more matching verbalizations, compared to the other two tasks."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Linguistic selection reasons were uttered most regardless of the selection task, suggesting a default linguistic selection strategy — related
• Tenth-graders show few signs of global task awareness when selecting text fragments, rarely rereading or deeply processing task instructions — related
• The most prevalent verbalization type was labeling text parts as important without stating any reason for selection — related