Epistemic processing of multiple science texts on the Internet

中学生、大学生和想要更多地了解科学主题的外行人通常会阅读来自不同来源和不同质量的多种文本（例如，维基百科条目、在线媒体、科学期刊、科学家的网页或科学博客）。通常情况下，这些文本传达了相互矛盾的信息，例如，当文本代表科学争议中的对立立场时。本研究旨在探讨学习者如何理解科学相关文本中相互冲突的信息，并构建有争议的科学问题的心理表征。该项目的第一阶段致力于开发和测试一个理论模型，该模型区分了如何从认识论上处理来自多个科学相关文本的冲突信息的浅层和详细的方法。该模型可以预测情境和基于学习者的条件对认知过程的影响，以及在多文本非正式学习中产生的心理表征。到目前为止，这些预测已经在9个连续的实验中得到了验证。浅加工似乎会导致片面的心理表征，偏向于学习者的初始信念，而精细的认知加工使学习者能够构建科学争议的平衡和丰富的心理表征。即将到来的项目阶段的建议研究集中在(1)科学争议的动机认知处理的特征，(2)澄清认知监测在冲突信息学习中的因果作用，以及(2)开发有效但经济的干预措施，以促进对有争议的科学问题的多文本学习。为此，我们提出了四个基于不同实验范式和方法的综合实验（其中包括阅读时眼动追踪实验、反应时间实验和训练实验）。

Students in secondary education, university students, and lay persons who want to learn more about a scientific topic usually read multiple texts from different sources and of varying quality (for example, Wikipedia entries, online media, scientific journals, scientists' web pages, or science blogs). More often than not these texts communicate conflicting information, for example when the texts represent opposing stances in a scientific controversy. This research project investigates how learners comprehend conflicting information in science-related texts and construct mental representations of controversial scientific issues. The first phase of the project was devoted to developing and testing a theoretical model which distinguishes a shallow and an elaborative way of how conflicting information from multiple science-related texts is processed epistemically. This model allows predictions concerning effects of situational and learner-based conditions on cognitive processes and the resulting mental representations in informal learning with multiple texts. So far, these predictions were tested in nine consecutive experiments. Whereas shallow processing seems to cause a one-sided mental representation which is biased towards learners' initial beliefs, elaborative epistemic processing enables learners to construct a balanced and rich mental representation of sicentific controversies. The proposed research for the upcoming project phase concentrates on (1) characteristics of a motivated epistemic processing of scientific controversies, (2) a clarification of the causal role of epistemic monitoring in learning with conflicting information, and (2) the development of effective but economical interventions to foster learning with multiple texts on controversial scientific issues. To this end, four comprehensive experiments are proposed, which are based on different experimental paradigms and methods (among others, eye tracking during reading, reaction time experiments, and training experiments).