The think-aloud emotion of sadness and prior knowledge predict coherence-based processing during reading of the other-side text¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? A standard multiple regression showed sadness and prior knowledge predicted coherence-based processing of the other-side text, F(2, 37) = 12.902, p < .001, R2 = .424. → Iordanou 2020
Evidence¶
Iordanou 2020¶
Iordanou, K., Kendeou, P., & Zembylas, M. (2020). Examining my-side bias during and after reading controversial historical accounts. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09240-w
q2 · i? · associational · r1
Standard multiple regression with coherence-based processing during other-side text reading as the dependent variable and think-aloud sadness and prior knowledge as predictors. Both were significant predictors; more coherence-based processing was exhibited by those expressing more sadness and having more prior knowledge.
"R for regression was significantly different from zero, F(2, 37) = 12.902, p <. 0 0 1 ,w i t hR2 at .424 with a 95% confidence interval ranging from 0.205 to 0.643."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Achievement Emotions — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
Related Claims¶
- Cognitive processing differs by text type: participants engaged in more epistemic processing, meta-comprehension, and coherence-based processing when reading the other-side text than the own-side text — related
- Emotions reported during think-aloud reading were mostly negative (anger, sadness) for both texts, in contrast to positive questionnaire-reported emotions toward the other ethnic group — related
- Epistemic beliefs, prior knowledge, and the think-aloud emotion of anger jointly predict low-epistemic processing during reading of the other-side text — related
- Greater anger, hopelessness, and negative emotions overall during reading are associated with poorer text comprehension, while positive emotions show no relation — related
- The frequency of associations produced during think-aloud reading predicts sentence reading times during silent reading — related
- Participants' prior knowledge about the historical event was entirely consistent with their own ethnic group's narrative, with none providing an alternative interpretation — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
sadness-prior-knowledge-predict-coherence-processing |
title |
The think-aloud emotion of sadness and prior knowledge predict coherence-based processing during reading of the other-side text |
description |
The think-aloud emotion of sadness and prior knowledge predict coherence-based processing during reading of the other-side text |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2020 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-19 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — iordanou-2020 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.