Readers with misconceptions engage in more conceptual change strategies than readers without misconceptions, but only when reading a refutation text¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2007 · checked against its sources 2026-10-19 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 In Experiment 1, the misconception group generated significantly more conceptual change strategies than the nonmisconception group, but only during reading of the refutation text (interaction η² = .42). → Kendeou 2007

Evidence¶

Kendeou 2007¶

Kendeou, P., & van den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory & Cognition, 35(7), 1567-1577. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193491

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

Think-aloud experiment with 86 University of Minnesota undergraduates (6 excluded), classified via the Force Concept Inventory into misconception and nonmisconception groups, reading refutation and nonrefutation physics texts. The interaction of prior knowledge and text structure on conceptual change strategies was significant (η² = .42), with post hoc differences only in the refutation text.

"This main effect was qualified by an interaction between prior knowledge and text structure [F(1,71) 50.8, p .0001, h2 .42]. Post hoc comparisons showed that the misconception group included more conceptual change strategies than did the nonmisconception group, but only during their reading of the refutation text"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Readers with misconceptions spend more time reading law sentences than readers without misconceptions, but only in refutation texts — related
• Readers with misconceptions generate more incorrect and fewer correct knowledge-based inferences than readers without misconceptions, in both text structures — related
• Reader misconceptions inhibit comprehension; low-skill readers prefer prior knowledge over contradictory text information — related
• Readers with misconceptions recall less textual information than readers without misconceptions, regardless of text structure — related
• Refutation texts produce greater conceptual change about multimedia-learning misconceptions than standard texts in student teachers — related
• Instruction that confronts science misconceptions (conceptual-conflict interventions, refutation text) produces conceptual change more often than standard exposition — a broader claim this one bears on
• Misconceptions impair comprehension of a standard text, and both a refutation text and a think sheet compensate for this detrimental effect — related
• Misconceptions were addressed in nine reviewed articles, all in science, via augmented activation, refutation texts, or analogical reasoning, though one study found activating inaccurate information may not be detrimental — related