本研究旨在探討學習者在多重文本閱讀任務中，其學習者特性、多重文本處理歷程及任務成效之關係。學習者特性包含資訊評判標準、主題信念及個人特質(積極心胸開放思維、認真盡責性)；多重文本處理歷程為視覺行為、學習投入及多重文本處理策略；任務成效則是多重文本資訊整合、溯源及決策。60位大學以上的參與者進行一項約二十分鐘的多重文本閱讀任務。進行任務前，他們先填寫量表與問卷，包含知識論證信念、主題信念及心胸開放思維與認真盡責性量表，之後閱讀六篇關於中西醫肝炎治療的文章，並於閱讀任務後撰寫一封信件給朋友一些關於肝炎治療的資訊與建議，任務過程全程使用Tobii Eye Tracker 4C眼動儀紀錄視覺軌跡。閱讀任務結束後，即填寫學習投入、多重文本處理策略及醫療決策量表並進行螢幕錄影輔助之半結構訪談。本研究採用驗證性因素分析、皮爾森積差相關分析及迴歸分析檢驗所有研究問題。研究結果顯示，在學習者特性方面，越傾向心胸開放思維的學習者，越不專注重複閱讀訊息來源與背景資訊，同時在任務過程中投入較少的負面情意感受，但投入較多的行為努力；且在任務後的決策表現則越傾向改變原先的決策，並對決策結果感到較高的信心。此外，越具有權威資訊判准信念(Justification by authority)的學習者，專注閱讀中醫治療資訊的時間越長；越具有個人經驗資訊判准信念的學習者，在連結不同立場的資訊整合表現越差。越認真盡責的學習者，認知投入越高並且運用越成熟的多重文本策略，但在呈現不同立場的資訊整合表現越差。另一方面，從多重文本資訊處理的過程來看，本研究發現，越專注重複閱讀中醫醫療資訊的學習者，有越好的資訊整合表現；越專注閱讀西醫醫療資訊的學習者，則在做醫療決策時越傾向詢問他人意見。最後，越專注重複閱讀資訊來源的學習者，則有越好的溯源表現；而越專注重複閱讀背景資訊或投入較多努力行為的學習者，則對決策結果越有信心。本研究有助於深入了解學習者特性在社會科學議題閱讀判准中所扮演的角色，研究發現將可對未來資訊素養教育相關研究及教學實務提供具體建議。

This study aims to explore the relationships among learners’ characteristics, multiple document processing, and task outcomes. Learners characteristics refers to justification beliefs, topic beliefs, and personality traits (i.e. actively open-minded thinking and conscientiousness); multiple document processing refers to visual behavior, learning engagement, and multiple-text strategy; and task outcomes refers to information integration, sourcing and decision-making. Sixty university students and graduates volunteered to participate a multiple document reading task about western and eastern medical issues. A pretest-posttest one-group experiment was designed for conducting the reading task. Before the reading task, participants were asked to fill out the scales and questionnaires of justification belief for knowledge scale, topic belief, actively open-minded thinking, and conscientiousness. After that, they were asked to read six articles about the medical treatment of hepatitis using Chinese and Western medicine, and then to write a letter to provide a friend with information and suggestions about hepatitis treatment. A Tobii Eye Tracker 4C eye tracker was used to record the visual behavior throughout the task. After the reading task, the participants self-reported their learning engagement, multiple-texts strategy and medical decision-making though scales, and a screen-assisted semi-structured interview was conducted. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA), Pearson’s correlation analyses, and regression analyses were adopted to examine all research questions proposed in this study. The results revealed that, in terms of learners’ characteristics, learners who tended to be more open-minded focused less on repeatedly reading source and background information; meanwhile, they were less engaged with negative feelings, but invested more behavioral efforts during the task. Moreover, the more open-minded learners, the more likely they were to change decisions, and they also had higher confidence in decision outcomes. In addition, the more the learners with justification by authority, the longer they focused on reading Chinese medical treatment information, while the more the learners with personal justification beliefs, the worse the information integration in presenting multiple positions. Furthermore, the more conscientious the learners, the higher the cognitive engagement and the more mature the multiple-text reading strategy, but the worse the performance of information integration in presenting different positions. On the other hand, in terms of the influences due to multiple document information processing, this study found that the longer time the learners spent reading Chinese medical treatment information repeatedly, the better the information integration outcome; whereas learners who focused more on reading Western medical treatment information tended to ask others’ opinions when making medical decisions. Finally, and most importantly, learners who spent longer time repeatedly reading source information had better sourcing performances, while learners who spent longer time reading background information or made more behavioral efforts tended to have more confidence in decision-making. This study furthered our understandings about the roles of learner characteristics played in the reading justification of socio-scientific issues. Findings of this study can provide suggestions for future research and teaching practices regarding information literacy education.

Alkış, N., & Temizel, T. T. (2018). The impact of motivation and personality on academic performance in online and blended learning environments. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(3), 35-47. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26458505
Barzilai, S., & Ka’adan, I. (2017). Learning to integrate divergent information sources: The interplay of epistemic cognition and epistemic metacognition. Metacognition and Learning, 12(2), 193-232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016-9165-7
Barzilai, S., & Zohar, A. (2012). Epistemic thinking in action: Evaluating and integrating online sources. Cognition and Instruction, 30(1), 39-85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016-9165-7
Ben-Eliyahu, A., Moore, D., Dorph, R., & Schunn, C. D. (2018). Investigating the multidimensionality of engagement: Affective, behavioral, and cognitive engagement across science activities and contexts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 53, 87-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.01.002
Bhagat, K. K., Wu, L. Y., & Chang, C. Y. (2019). The impact of personality on students’ perceptions towards online learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 98-108. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4162
Bingle, W. H., & Gaskell, P. J. (1994). Scientific literacy for decision making and the social construction of scientific knowledge. Science Education, 78(2), 185-201. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730780206
Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Strien, J. L. (2018). Instruction to Promote Information Problem Solving on the Internet in Primary and Secondary Education: A Systematic Literature Review. In Handbook of Multiple Source Use (pp. 401-422). Routledge.
Brandt, N. D., Lechner, C. M., Tetzner, J., & Rammstedt, B. (2019). Personality, cognitive ability, and academic performance: Differential associations across school subjects and school tracks. Journal of personality, 2019; 00:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12482
Braasch, J. L., Rouet, J. F., Vibert, N., & Britt, M. A. (2012). Readers’ use of source information in text comprehension. Memory & cognition, 40(3), 450-465. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-011-0160-6
Brante, E. W., & Strømsø, H. I. (2018). Sourcing in text comprehension: A review of interventions targeting sourcing skills. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), https://doi.org/10.1007/773-799. 10.1007/s10648-017-9421-7
Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2011). Measuring strategic processing when students read multiple texts. Metacognition and Learning, 6(2), 111-130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-011-9075-7
Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2020). On the roles of dispositions and beliefs in learning from multiple perspectives. Handbook of learning from multiple representations and perspectives, 141-163. Routledge.
Bråten, I., Brandmo, C., & Kammerer, Y. (2019). A validation study of the internet-specific epistemic justification inventory with Norwegian preservice teachers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(4), 877-900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633118769438
Bråten, I., Brante, E. W., & Strømsø, H. I. (2018). What really matters: The role of behavioural engagement in multiple document literacy tasks. Journal of Research in Reading, 41(4), 680-699. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12247
Bråten, I., Ferguson, L. E., Anmarkrud, Ø., & Strømsø, H. I. (2013). Prediction of learning and comprehension when adolescents read multiple texts: The roles of word-level processing, strategic approach, and reading motivation. Reading and Writing, 26(3), 321-348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-012-9371-x
Bråten, I., Ferguson, L. E., Anmarkrud, Ø., Strømsø, H. I., & Brandmo, C. (2014). Modeling relations between students’ justification for knowing beliefs in science, motivation for understanding what they read in science, and science achievement. International Journal of Educational Research, 66, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2014.01.004
Bråten, I., Ferguson, L. E., Strømsø, H. I., & Anmarkrud, Ø. (2013). Justification beliefs and multiple-documents comprehension. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28(3), 879-902. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-012-0145-2
Bråten, I., Ferguson, L. E., Strømsø, H. I., & Anmarkrud, Ø. (2014). Students working with multiple conflicting documents on a scientific issue: Relations between epistemic cognition while reading, sourcing, and argumentation in essays. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(1), 58-85. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12005
Bråten, I., Stadtler, M., & Salmerón, L. (2018). The role of sourcing in discourse comprehension. In M. F. Schober, D. N. Rapp, & M. A. Britt (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of discourse processes (pp. 141–166). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Britt, M. A., & Sommer, J. (2004). Facilitating textual integration with macro-structure focusing tasks. Reading Psychology, 25(4), 313-339. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702710490522658
Cerdán, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2008). The effects of tasks on integrating information from multiple documents. Journal of educational psychology, 100(1), 209-222. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.209
Chang, H., & Lee, H. (2010). College students’ decision-making tendencies in the context of socioscientific issues (SSI). Journal of Korean Association in Science Education, 30(7), 887-900. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2010.30.7.887
Chang, H. Y., Liang, J. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2020). Students’ context-specific epistemic justifications, prior knowledge, engagement, and socioscientific reasoning in a mobile augmented reality learning environment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(3), 399-408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09825-9
Chen, Y. Y., Li, C. M., Liang, J. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2018). Health information obtained from the internet and changes in medical decision making: questionnaire development and cross-sectional survey. Journal of medical Internet research, 20(2), e47. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.9370
Cheng, Y.-H., & Tsai, C.-C. (2017). Online Research Behaviors of Engineering Graduate Students in Taiwan. Educational Technology & Society, 20 (1), 169–179. https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.20.1.169
Cohen, A., & Baruth, O. (2017). Personality, learning, and satisfaction in fully online academic courses. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.030
Dinsmore, D. L., & Alexander, P. A. (2016). A multidimensional investigation of deep-level and surface-level processing. The Journal of Experimental Education, 84(2), 213-244. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2014.979126
Dollinger, S. J., Matyja, A. M., & Huber, J. L. (2008). Which factors best account for academic success: Those which college students can control or those they cannot?. Journal of research in Personality, 42(4), 872-885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.11.007
Drachsler H., Kirschner P.A. (2012) Learner Characteristics. In: Seel N.M. (Eds) Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. Springer, Boston, MA
Dumfart, B., & Neubauer, A. C. (2016). Conscientiousness is the most powerful noncognitive predictor of school achievement in adolescents. Journal of individual Differences. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000182
Eickhoff, C., Gwizdka, J., Hauff, C., & He, J. (2017). Introduction to the special issue on search as learning. Information Retrieval Journal, 20(5), 399-402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10791-017-9315-9
Eilam, B., Zeidner, M., & Aharon, I. (2009). Student conscientiousness, self‐regulated learning, and science achievement: an explorative field study. Psychology in the Schools, 46(5), 420-432. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20387
Eggert, S., & Bögeholz, S. (2010). Students' use of decision‐making strategies with regard to socioscientific issues: An application of the Rasch partial credit model. Science Education, 94(2), 230-258. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20358
Eggert, S., Ostermeyer, F., Hasselhorn, M., & Bögeholz, S. (2013). Socioscientific decision making in the science classroom: The effect of embedded metacognitive instructions on students' learning outcomes. Education Research International, 2013, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/309894
Evagorou, M., Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Osborne, J. (2012). ‘Should we kill the grey squirrels?’ A study exploring students’ justifications and decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 34(3), 401-428. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.619211
Everingham, Y. L., Gyuris, E., & Connolly, S. R. (2017). Enhancing student engagement to positively impact mathematics anxiety, confidence and achievement for interdisciplinary science subjects. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 48(8), 1153-1165. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2017.1305130
Fang, S. C., Hsu, Y. S., & Lin, S. S. (2019). Conceptualizing socioscientific decision making from a review of research in science education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(3), 427-448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9890-2
Ferguson, L. E., Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Anmarkrud, Ø. (2013). Epistemic beliefs and comprehension in the context of reading multiple documents: Examining the role of conflict. International Journal of Educational Research, 62, 100-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2013.07.001
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of educational research, 74(1), 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Gawronski, B., & Strack, F. (2012). Cognitive consistency as a basic principle of social information processing. In B. Gawronski & F. Strack (Eds.), Cognitive consistency: A fundamental principle in social cognition (p. 1–16). Guilford Press.
Gil, L., Bråten, I., Vidal-Abarca, E., & Strømsø, H. I. (2010a). Understanding and integrating multiple science texts: Summary tasks are sometimes better than argument tasks. Reading Psychology, 31(1), 30-68. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702710902733600
Gil, L., Bråten, I., Vidal-Abarca, E., & Strømsø, H. I. (2010b). Summary versus argument tasks when working with multiple documents: Which is better for whom?. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(3), 157-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.11.002
Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. G. (2006). The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007.
Goldman, S. R., Blair, A., & Burkett, C. M. (2018). Assessment of multiple resource comprehension and information problem solving. In Handbook of multiple source use (pp. 466-484). Routledge.
Goldman, S. R., & Scardamalia, M. (2013). Managing, understanding, applying, and creating knowledge in the information age: Next-generation challenges and opportunities. Cognition and Instruction, 31(2), 255-269. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2013.773217
Granziera, H., & Perera, H. N. (2019). Relations among teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs, engagement, and work satisfaction: A social cognitive view. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 58, 75-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.02.003
Greene, B. A., Miller, R. B., Crowson, H. M., Duke, B. L., & Akey, K. L. (2004). Predicting high school student’s cognitive engagement and achievement: Contributions of classroom perceptions and motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 462–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.01.006
Greene, J. A., Sandoval, W. A., & Bråten, I. (2016). An introduction to epistemic cognition. In Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 13-28). Routledge.
Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., Britt, M. A., & Salas, C. R. (2012). The role of clear thinking in learning science from multiple-document ınquiry tasks. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 5(1), 63-78.
Gresch, H., Hasselhorn, M., & Bögeholz, S. (2013). Training in decision-making strategies: An approach to enhance students’ competence to deal with socio-scientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 35(15), 2587-2607. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.617789
Gutierez, S. B. (2015). Integrating Socio-Scientific Issues to Enhance the Bioethical Decision-Making Skills of High School Students. International Education Studies, 8(1), 142-151. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n1p142
Gwizdka, J., & Zhang, Y. (2015, August). Differences in eye-tracking measures between visits and revisits to relevant and irrelevant web pages. In Proceedings of the 38th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 811-814).
Hahnel, C., Kroehne, U., Goldhammer, F., Schoor, C., Mahlow, N., & Artelt, C. (2019). Validating process variables of sourcing in an assessment of multiple document comprehension. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 524-537. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12278
Hansen, P., & Rieh, S. Y. (2016). Editorial: Recent advances on searching as learning: An introduction to the special issue. Journal of Information Science, 42(1), 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551515614473
Haran, U., Ritov, I., & Mellers, B. A. (2013). The Role of Actively Open-Minded Thinking in Information Acquisition, Accuracy, and Calibration. Judgment and Decision Making, 8 (3), 188-201. https://repository.upenn.edu/marketing_papers/413
Hariyono, E., Prastowo, T., & Hartati, M. (2020, March). Physics Student’s Research Skills Performance: A Field-Based Approach in Geoscience Learning. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1491, No. 1, p. 012003). IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1491/1/012003
Hautala, J., Kiili, C., Kammerer, Y., Loberg, O., Hokkanen, S., & Leppänen, P. H. (2018). Sixth graders’ evaluation strategies when reading Internet search results: an eye-tracking study. Behaviour & Information Technology, 37(8), 761-773. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2018.1477992
Hsu, C.-Y., Chiou, G.-L., & Tsai, M.-J. (2016, August). A pilot study on developing and validating a fixation-based scaffolding learning system. Poster presented at 2016 International Conference of East-Asian Association for Science Education. Tokyo, Japan.
Jho, H., Yoon, H. G., & Kim, M. (2014). The relationship of science knowledge, attitude and decision making on socio-scientific issues: The case study of students’ debates on a nuclear power plant in Korea. Science & Education, 23(5), 1131-1151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9652-z
Jian, Y. C., & Wu, C. J. (2015). Using eye tracking to investigate semantic and spatial representations of scientific diagrams during text-diagram integration. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(1), 43-55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9519-3
Kammerer, Y., Bråten, I., Gerjets, P., & Strømsø, H. I. (2013). The role of Internet-specific epistemic beliefs in laypersons’ source evaluations and decisions during Web search on a medical issue. Computers in human behavior, 29(3), 1193-1203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.012
Kammerer, Y., Gottschling, S., & Bråten, I. (2021). The role of internet-specific justification beliefs in source evaluation and corroboration during web search on an unsettled socio-scientific issue. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(2), 342-378. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120952731
Kammerer, Y., Meier, N., & Stahl, E. (2016). Fostering secondary-school students’ intertext model formation when reading a set of websites: The effectiveness of source prompts. Computers & Education, 102, 52-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.07.001
Kardash, C. M., & Howell, K. L. (2000). Effects of epistemological beliefs and topic-specific beliefs on undergraduates' cognitive and strategic processing of dual-positional text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 524–535. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.3.524
Keller, H., & Karau, S. J. (2013). The importance of personality in students’ perceptions of the online learning experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2494-2500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.007
Kelly, D., & Donaldson, D. (2016). Investigating the complexities of academic success: Personality constrains the effects of metacognition. The Psychology of Education Review, 40(2), 17-24. STORRE. http://hdl.handle.net/1893/24578
Kertechian, S. K. (2018). Conscientiousness as a key to success for academic achievement among French university students enrolled in management studies. The International Journal of Management Education, 16(2), 154-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2018.02.003
Kim, L. E., Poropat, A. E., & MacCann, C. (2016). Conscientiousness in education: Its conceptualization, assessment, and utility. In Psychosocial Skills and School Systems in the 21st Century (pp. 155-185). Springer, Cham.
Kruglanski, A.W., & Shteynberg, G. (2012). Cognitive consistency as means to an end: How 27 subjective logic affords knowledge. In B. Gawronski & F. Strack (Eds.), Cognitive consistency: A fundamental principle in social cognition (pp. 245-264). New York: Guilford.
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 159–174.
Lee, Y. C. (2012). Socio-scientific issues in health contexts: Treading a rugged terrain. International Journal of Science Education, 34(3), 459-483. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.613417
Lee, Y. C., & Grace, M. (2010). Students' reasoning processes in making decisions about an authentic, local socio-scientific issue: bat conservation. Journal of Biological Education, 44(4), 156-165. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2010.9656216
List, A., & Du, H. (2021). Reasoning beyond history: examining students’ strategy use when completing a multiple text task addressing a controversial topic in education. Reading and Writing, 34(4), 1003-1048. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-020-10095-5
List, A., Du, H., Wang, Y., & Lee, H. Y. (2019). Toward a typology of integration: Examining the documents model framework. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 58, 228-242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.03.003
List, A., & Alexander, P. A. (2018). Cold and warm perspectives on the cognitive affective engagement model of multiple source use. In Handbook of multiple source use (pp. 34-54). Routledge.
List, A., Alexander, P. A., & Stephens, L. A. (2017). Trust but verify: Examining the association between students' sourcing behaviors and ratings of text trustworthiness. Discourse Processes, 54(2), 83-104. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2016.1174654
Liu, S. Y., Lin, C. S., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). College students' scientific epistemological views and thinking patterns in socioscientific decision making. Science Education, 95(3), 497-517. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20422
Lubbers, M. J., Van Der Werf, M. P., Kuyper, H., & Hendriks, A. J. (2010). Does homework behavior mediate the relation between personality and academic performance?. Learning and Individual differences, 20(3), 203-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2010.01.005
Macedo-Rouet, M., Braasch, J. L., Britt, M. A., & Rouet, J. F. (2013). Teaching fourth and fifth graders to evaluate information sources during text comprehension. Cognition and Instruction, 31(2), 204-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2013.769995
Mason, L., Boldrin, A. & Ariasi, N. (2010). Epistemic metacognition in context: evaluating and learning online information. Metacognition Learning 5, 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-009-9048-2
Mason, L., & Florit, E. (2018). Complementary methods for assessing online processing of multiple sources. In Handbook of multiple source use (pp. 425-446). Routledge.
Mason, L., Pluchino, P. & Ariasi, N. (2014). Reading information about a scientific phenomenon on webpages varying for reliability: an eye-movement analysis. Education Tech Research Dev, 62, 663–685. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-9356-3
Mason, L., Scrimin, S., Tornatora, M. C., Suitner, C., & Moè, A. (2018). Internet source evaluation: The role of implicit associations and psychophysiological self-regulation. Computers & Education, 119, 59-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.12.009
Mislevy, R. J., & Haertel, G. D. (2006). Implications of evidence‐centered design for educational testing. Educational measurement: issues and practice, 25(4), 6-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2006.00075.x
Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., Almond, R. G., & Lukas, J. F. (2006). Concepts, terminology, and basic models of evidence-centered design. Automated scoring of complex tasks in computer-based testing, 15-47. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Ngiam, W. X., Khaw, K. L., Holcombe, A. O., & Goodbourn, P. T. (2019). Visual working memory for letters varies with familiarity but not complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45(10), 1761. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000682
Ng, C., & Graham, S. (2018). Improving literacy engagement: enablers, challenges and catering for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Journal of Research in Reading, 41(4), 615-624. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12252
Olivier, E., Archambault, I., De Clercq, M., & Galand, B. (2019). Student self-efficacy, classroom engagement, and academic achievement: Comparing three theoretical frameworks. Journal of youth and adolescence, 48(2), 326-340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-018-0952-0
Ratcliffe, M. (1997). Pupil decision‐making about socio‐scientific issues within the science curriculum. International Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 167-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069970190203
Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students' academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin, 138(2), 353. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026838
Rieh, S. Y., Collins-Thompson, K., Hansen, P., & Lee, H. J. (2016). Towards searching as a learning process: A review of current perspectives and future directions. Journal of Information Science, 42(1), 19-34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551515615841
Rukavina, I., & Daneman, M. (1996). Integration and its effect on acquiring knowledge about competing scientific theories for text. Journal of Educational psychology, 88(2), 272. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.88.2.272
Rundgren, C. J., Eriksson, M., & Rundgren, S. N. C. (2016). Investigating the intertwinement of knowledge, value, and experience of upper secondary students’ argumentation concerning socioscientific issues. Science & Education, 25(9-10), 1049-1071. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-016-9859-x
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009
Salmerón, L., Delgado, P., & Mason, L. (2020). Using eye‐movement modelling examples to improve critical reading of multiple webpages on a conflicting topic. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(6), 1038-1051. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12458
Salmerón, L., Gil, L., & Bråten, I. (2018). Effects of reading real versus print-out versions of multiple documents on students’ sourcing and integrated understanding. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 52, 25-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.12.002
Salmerón, L., Gil, L., & Bråten, I. (2018). Using Eye-Tracking to Assess Sourcing during Multiple Document Reading: A Critical Analysis. Frontline Learning Research, 6(3), 105-122. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v6i3.368
Salmerón, L., Naumann, J., García, V., & Fajardo, I. (2017). Scanning and deep processing of information in hypertext: an eye tracking and cued retrospective think‐aloud study. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(3), 222-233. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12152
Schieler, A., Koenig, M., & Buttelmann, D. (2018). Fourteen-month-olds selectively search for and use information depending on the familiarity of the informant in both laboratory and home contexts. Journal of experimental child psychology, 174, 112-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2018.05.010
Siddiquei, N., & Khalid, R. (2018). The relationship between personality traits, learning styles and academic performance of e-learners. Open Praxis, 10(3), 249-263. LearnTechLib. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/187321/
Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C., & Lombardi, D. (2015). The challenges of defining and measuring student engagement in science. Educational Psychologist, 50:1, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.1002924
Stanovich K.E. & West R.F. (2007) Natural myside bias is independent of cognitive ability. Thinking & Reasoning, 13(3), 225–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780600780796
Pieschl, S., & Sivyer, D. (2021). Secondary students’ epistemic thinking and year as predictors of critical source evaluation of Internet blogs. Computers & Education, 160, 104038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104038
Şendurur, E., & Yildirim, Z. (2015). Students’ web search strategies with different task types: an eye-tracking study. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 31(2), 101-111. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2014.959105
Strømsø, H. I., & Bråten, I. (2014). Students’ sourcing while reading and writing from multiple web documents. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 9(02), 92-111. https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1891-943X-2014-02-02
Strømsø, H. I., Bråten, I., & Britt, M. A. (2010). Reading multiple texts about climate change: The relationship between memory for sources and text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 20(3), 192-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.001
Strømsø, H. I., Bråten, I., & Stenseth, T. (2017). The role of students’ prior topic beliefs in recall and evaluation of information from texts on socio-scientific issues. Nordic Psychology, 69(3), 127-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/19012276.2016.1198270
Strømsø, H. I., & Kammerer, Y. (2016). Epistemic cognition and reading for understanding in the Internet age. Handbook of epistemic cognition, 230-246. Routledge.
Svedholm-Häkkinen, A. M., & Lindeman, M. (2018). Actively open-minded thinking: development of a shortened scale and disentangling attitudes towards knowledge and people. Thinking & Reasoning, 24(1), 21-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2017.1378723
Theobald, M., Bellhäuser, H., & Imhof, M. (2018). Identifying individual differences using log-file analysis: Distributed learning as mediator between conscientiousness and exam grades. Learning and Individual Differences, 65, 112-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.05.019
Tsai, M.-J., Hsu, P.-F. & Pai, H.-T. (2018, June). Lag sequential analysis in Eye-Tracking Data Analyzer (EDA) for educational researchers. Poster presented at the 4th International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET 2018), Osaka, Japan. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISET.2018.00050
Tsai, M.-J., Huang, L. J., Hou, H. T., Hsu, C.-Y., & Chiou, G.-L. (2016). Visual behavior, flow and achievement in game-based learning. Computers and Education, 98, 115-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.011
Tsai, M. J., & Wu, A. H. (2021). Visual search patterns, information selection strategies, and information anxiety for online information problem solving. Computers & Education, 172, 104236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104236
van Laar, E., Van Deursen, A. J., Van Dijk, J. A., & De Haan, J. (2020). Measuring the levels of 21st-century digital skills among professionals working within the creative industries: A performance-based approach. Poetics, 81, 101434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2020.101434
Van Bragt, C. A. C., Bakx, A. W. E. A., Bergen, T. C. M., & Croon, M. A. (2010). Looking for students’ personal characteristics predicting study outcome. Higher Education, 61(1), 59–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9325-7
Walraven, A., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Boshuizen, H. P. (2009). How students evaluate information and sources when searching the World Wide Web for information. Computers & education, 52(1), 234-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.003
Wang, C.-Y., Tsai, M.-J., & Tsai, C.-C. (2020). Predicting cognitive structures and information processing modes by eye-tracking when reading controversial reports about socio-scientific issues. Computers in Human Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106471
Yi, L., Zhou, Q., Xiao, T., Qing, G., & Mayer, I. (2020). Conscientiousness in game-based learning. Simulation & Gaming, 51(5), 712-734. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878120927061
Zo'bi, A. S. (2014). The Effect of Using Socio-Scientific Issues Approach in Teaching Environmental Issues on Improving the Students' Ability of Making Appropriate Decisions towards These Issues. International Education Studies, 7(8), 113-123. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v7n8p113