More Than (Single) Text Comprehension? – On University Students’ Understanding of Multiple Documents

Abstract

The digital revolution has made a multitude of text documents from highly diverse perspectives on almost any topic easily available. Accordingly, the ability to integrate and evaluate information from different sources, known as multiple document comprehension, has become increasingly important. Because multiple document comprehension requires the integration of content and source information across texts, it is assumed to exceed the demands of single text comprehension due to the inclusion of two additional mental representations: the integrated situation model and the intertext model. To date, there is little empirical evidence on commonalities and differences between single text and multiple document comprehension. Although the relationships between single text and multiple document comprehension can be well distinguished conceptually, there is a lack of empirical studies supporting these assumptions. Therefore, we investigated the dimensional structure of single text and multiple document comprehension with similar test setups. We examined commonalities and differences between the two forms of text comprehension in terms of their relations to final school exam grades, level of university studies and university performance. Using a sample of n = 501 students from two German universities, we jointly modeled single text and multiple document comprehension and applied a series of regression models. Concerning the relationship between single text and multiple document comprehension, confirmatory dimensionality analyses revealed the best fit for a model with two separate factors (latent correlation: 0.84) compared to a two-dimensional model with cross-loadings and fixed covariance between the latent factors and a model with a general factor. Accordingly, the results indicate that single text and multiple document comprehension are separable yet correlated constructs. Furthermore, we found that final school exam grades, level of university studies and prior university performance statistically significant predicted both single text and multiple document comprehension and that expected future university performance was predicted by multiple document

Automated and controlled processes in comprehending multiple documents

“…Furthermore, while not an explicit part of our investigation, one might have expected that proximal behavioral indicators mediate the effect of distal cognitive skills on performance (see Hahnel et al 2017)-a reasonable view from a general perspective on item processing. However, current theories of MD reading do not provide indication for a full mediation effect involving readingrelated skills as predictors and MD-specific behaviors as mediators (for an overview of theoretical perspectives on MDC, see Mahlow et al 2020). Our results also indicate against such a mediating effect.…”

“…We fitted a Partial Credit Model (n = 506 cases) with the R package TAM (Robitzsch, Kiefer, and Wu 2019) and obtained Weighted Likelihood Estimates (WLEs) as indicator of students' reading comprehension (WLE reliability = .71). A previous study demonstrated that the NEPS reading comprehension and the MDC test assess highly correlated, but independent skills (Mahlow et al 2020).…”

“…This result corresponds with findings on primary school children (Florit, Cain, and Mason 2019) and supports the view that, without a complex navigational structure, working memory demands in MD reading do not exceed those of text comprehension (Hahnel et al 2017;cf. Barzilai and Strømsø 2018;Mahlow et al 2020). Moreover, the indicators of students' work process uniquely contributed to the prediction of MD comprehension beyond cognitive skills.…”

“…It requires students to compare, evaluate and integrate different text and meta-text information across documents and to represent information embedded in specific document contexts (e.g. Anmarkrud, Bråten, and Strømsø 2014;Mahlow et al 2020;Schoor, Hahnel, Mahlow et al 2020). In this regard, MD reading shares similarities with processes of problem-solving.…”

Einschätzungen von Textunterschieden durch Lehramtsstudent*innen: Eine Studie am Beispiel von Texten zum Umgang mit (Leistungs‑)Heterogenität

“…übereinstimmen. Erste Forschungsergebnisse hierzu konnten bereits Mahlow et al (2020) generieren, die aufzeigen, dass basierend auf dem MDC-Test von Schoor et al (2020) und dem (ergebnisorientierten) Lesekompetenztest des Nationalen Bildungspanels (NEPS) bei n = 501 Student*innen zweier deutscher Universitäten die MDC-Fähigkeiten von der erfassten Lesekompetenz empirisch getrennt werden können. Die statistischen Modellierungen legen K hierbei nahe, dass die MDC-Anforderungen und die Lesekompetenz weder durch einen gemeinsamen Faktor noch durch die Annahme, dass MDC-Fähigkeiten auf die Lesekompetenz aufbauen, erklärt werden können.…”