Reader misconceptions inhibit comprehension; low-skill readers prefer prior knowledge over contradictory text information¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 2 studies · 2 review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? When text contradicts prior knowledge, children preference prior knowledge; low-skill readers omit contradictory information and replace it with their misconception in recall. → Reid Smith 2021 q2 i? Above-average readers are more likely to identify contradictions between prior knowledge and text than below-average readers. → Reid Smith 2021 (2)

Evidence¶

Reid Smith 2021¶

Reid Smith, Pamela Snow, Tanya Serry & Lorraine Hammond (2021) The Role of Background Knowledge in Reading Comprehension: A Critical Review, Reading Psychology, 42:3, 214-240, https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2021.1888348

q2 · i? · review · r2

Review reports Lipson (1982): children relied more heavily on prior knowledge than on the text when information contradicted prior knowledge, with low-skill readers substituting misconceptions in recall.

"When asked to recall the contents of the article, low skill readers were much more likely to omit contradictory information from the text and replace with their misconception."

Reid Smith 2021 (2)¶

Reid Smith, Pamela Snow, Tanya Serry & Lorraine Hammond (2021) The Role of Background Knowledge in Reading Comprehension: A Critical Review, Reading Psychology, 42:3, 214-240, https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2021.1888348

q2 · i? · review · r2

Review reports Holmes (1983) replication with above/below-average readers, showing differential ability to detect and resolve text-knowledge inconsistencies.

"She observed similar effects to Lipson, noting that above-average readers were more likely to identify contradictions between prior knowledge and information in the text. Below-average readers were more reliant on their (incorrect) knowledge and struggled to resolve inconsistencies between the text and prior knowledge (Holmes, 1983)."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Prior Knowledge — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• Higher background knowledge enables better reading comprehension for both skilled and low-skilled primary readers — related
• Background knowledge has a greater impact on comprehension of expository texts than narrative texts for primary children — related
• Readers with misconceptions recall less textual information than readers without misconceptions, regardless of text structure — related
• For readers with misconceptions, the number of correct inferences generated during think-aloud reading predicts text recall — related
• Readers with misconceptions engage in more conceptual change strategies than readers without misconceptions, but only when reading a refutation text — related
• Readers with misconceptions generate more incorrect and fewer correct knowledge-based inferences than readers without misconceptions, in both text structures — related
• Readers with misconceptions spend more time reading law sentences than readers without misconceptions, but only in refutation texts — related
• Incorrect inference generation is more common for elaborative than for coherence inference failures, indicating children are less aware which information is relevant for elaborative inferences — related