Readers’ Selective Recall of Source Features as a Function of Claim Discrepancy and Task Demands

Saux, Gastón; Ros, Christine; Britt, M. Anne; Stadtler, Marc; Burin, Débora Inés; Rouet, Jean-François

doi:10.1080/0163853x.2018.1463722

Cited by 18 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, preference for the knowledgeable source was significantly increased when participants read discrepant as opposed to consistent stories. This confirms the trend observed in Experiment 1, and adds support to the role of discrepancy in readers' attention to source features (e.g., Braasch et al, 2012;Gottschling et al, 2019;Kammerer et al, 2016;Saux et al, 2018;Stadtler & Bromme, 2014). Upon noticing a discrepancy that cannot be interpreted based on prior knowledge, readers scrutinize the sources in search for credibility cues (e.g., information about what the source knows and how they know what they know).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…A study by Saux et al (2018) used short stories in which two characters (i.e., embedded sources) agreed or disagreed about some event or situation. The characters were introduced with a description of either how they had access to knowledge (e.g., [the policeman] "who inspected the facility") or what they looked like (e.g., [the policeman] "who held a tissue on his face").…”

Section: The Present Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because previous efforts using a cued source recall task generated a high level of unattempted trials (e.g., Saux et al, 2018), in the present experiment we probed readers' memory using a recognition task. The recognition task was created by displaying the sources, the features, and the statements from each critical story among a set of distractors (see Figure 1).…”

Section: Materials and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Inside Document Models: Role of Source Attributes in Readers’ Integration of Multiple Text Contents

Rouet

Saux

Ros

et al. 2020

Discourse Processes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Text comprehension involves the ability to understand how texts relate to the situation they describe and to each other (i.e., a Document model; . Research into Document models has emphasized the role of information sources in structuring readers' mental models of situations. The present paper reviews research on source comprehension and examines new hypotheses regarding source encoding during text comprehension. Two experiments examined college students' evaluation and recognition of two embedded sources as a function of the consistency of their statements (Experiments 1 and 2) and the demands of the reading task (Experiment 2). Sources were introduced either with a knowledge feature (e.g., how the source knew what they knew) or a control feature. Readers were more likely to select the knowledgeable source as more competent and to justify their selection by referring to the knowledge feature (Experiment 1). Experiment 2 found that readers' preference for knowledgeable sources was stronger when the content statements were discrepant. Preference for knowledgeable sources was also stronger when the task focused on source knowledge, as compared to a control evaluation task or a baseline reading task. The source knowledge evaluation task distinctively enhanced participants' integration of the source designations with their respective statements, as compared to the control and baseline conditions. Results are discussed in light of current theories of single and multiple document comprehension. Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation DP-D-19-00102R1 revision 2Reviews and response letter Dear Dr Rouet, Thank you for submitting your manuscript Inside document models: The role of source attributes in integrating multiple text contents to Discourse Processes.I have now received reviews of the paper from experts who reflect Discourse Processes' multidisciplinary readership. All the reviewers find the topic interesting and potentially relevant for our readership, and they recommend that the paper be published in the special issue subject to minor revisions.Having taken the reviewers' evaluations into account, I am happy to accept the paper for publication in the special issue of Discourse Processes, subject to revisions that address the reviewers' concerns, which are appended below. Congratulations!We are delighted to learn that our paper is conditionally accepted. We have given careful consideration to the reviewers' additional comments and we have tried to address them adequately. Our responses are highlighted in blue. We thank you and the reviewers for your support during the revision process. Best regardsJean-François Rouet on behalf of all co-authors Reviewer #1: I have appreciated the authors' effort in considering the various comments raised by the reviewers and how they justified how they addressed the recommended modifications and elaborations. The revised paper is an improvement of the previous version. Although I am not fully convinced of the value of the very simple rea...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: The Present Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Materials and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Inside Document Models: Role of Source Attributes in Readers’ Integration of Multiple Text Contents

Rouet

Saux

Ros

et al. 2020

Discourse Processes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The D-ISC assumption (Braasch et al, 2012 ) states that readers are more likely to focus on source information when confronted with inconsistent information. As the findings by Braasch et al ( 2012 ) and associated research (e.g., de Pereyra et al, 2014 ; Rouet et al, 2016 ; Saux et al, 2018 ) indicate, one way for readers to resolve the inconsistencies is to revisit the passage of the text with the source information or to provide more resources when initially processing the source information. In Experiment 2 , we could not explore this possibility because the self-paced reading paradigm used in our experiments prevented readers from returning to previously read sentences.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Source credibility modulates the validation of implausible information

Wertgen

Richter

2020

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Validation of text information as a general mechanism for detecting inconsistent or false information is an integral part of text comprehension. This study examined how the credibility of the information source affects validation processes. Two experiments investigated combined effects of source credibility and plausibility of information during validation with explicit (ratings) and implicit (reading times) measurements. Participants read short stories with a high-credible versus low-credible person that stated a consistent or inconsistent assertion with general world knowledge. Ratings of plausibility and ratings of source credibility were lower when a credible source stated a world-knowledge inconsistent assertion compared with a low-credible source. Reading times on target sentences and on spillover sentences were slower when a credible source stated an assertion inconsistent with world knowledge compared with a low-credible source, suggesting that source information modulated the validation of implausible information. These results show that source credibility modulates validation and suggest a bidirectional relationship of perceived plausibility and source credibility in the reading process.

show abstract

“…Interestingly, however, because the development of a personal stance towards a topic leans both on strategic as well as automatic processes, the result of evaluating sources will not always take the same direction. When a reader's purpose is to actively elaborate a balanced representation of the topic, source evaluation favours increased attention and use of trustworthy contents (e.g., Gottschling et al., 2019; Kammerer et al, 2016; Rouet et al., 2020; Salmerón et al., 2016; Saux et al., 2018; Stadtler et al., 2014; von der Mühlen et al., 2016; Wiley et al., 2009). However, if the evaluation occurs in an automatic and routine fashion, it may lead to a one‐sided, biased model that will exclude information from reliable documents if they do not match the reader's prior knowledge and beliefs (see Richter & Maier, 2017, for a review).…”

Section: The Role Of Evaluation When Representing Multiple Textsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building mental models from multiple texts: How readers construct coherence from inconsistent sources

Saux

Britt

Vibert

et al. 2021

Language and Linguist. Compass

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Text comprehension theories propose that readers try to achieve a coherent representation of the situation depicted in a text. When reading multiple texts on the same topic, however, achieving a coherent representation of a situation poses additional challenges. Different sources may offer inconsistent descriptions or interpretations of the situation, or even contradict one another. Thus, additional assumptions are needed to explain how readers build a coherent representation of a situation when reading multiple individual texts on the same subject. This paper reviews research contributions from the psychology of text comprehension on how readers integrate inconsistent information from multiple sources. We concentrate on two key processes: The construction of an interconnected representation of sources and text contents, and the evaluation of the acquired information. We begin by briefly discussing the standard approach of single‐text comprehension theories to representational coherence. Then, we examine the Documents Model Framework and other, associated proposals that claim that readers can achieve coherence of divergent text contents by constructing a representation of the texts which integrates information about the sources of the contents. We also consider the role of source evaluation as a reader strategy for constructing a single, coherent solution. Finally, we discuss theoretical and practical implications and we make suggestions for further readings.

show abstract

Readers’ Selective Recall of Source Features as a Function of Claim Discrepancy and Task Demands

Cited by 18 publications

References 30 publications

Inside Document Models: Role of Source Attributes in Readers’ Integration of Multiple Text Contents

Inside Document Models: Role of Source Attributes in Readers’ Integration of Multiple Text Contents

Source credibility modulates the validation of implausible information

Building mental models from multiple texts: How readers construct coherence from inconsistent sources

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About