Study On The Influence Of Epistemological Beliefs During Multiple-texts Reading Comprehension

The biggest consequence of the information era is redundant information replaces lack of information. Even on the same subject, the individual may be collect a lot of, even conflicting information from different media, different texts. The main research area of multiple-texts reading comprehension is how individuals understand, identify, compare, and integrate information from many different texts.Epistemological beliefs are the belief systems of knowledge and knowing, which contains some different dimensions. Each dimension is more or less independent. Epistemological beliefs play an important role in a variety of learning and teaching, and also influence academic achievements. Therefore, epistemological beliefs are also one of the important factors to understand the field of multiple-texts reading comprehension. Some previous researches’have pointed out the fact that there is a certain link between the epistemological beliefs and multiple-texts reading comprehension. But there are still some controversies about the nature of this link.The controversies focused on the following issues. First, whether the epistemological beliefs were associated with the multiple-texts reading comprehension? If the association were true, the development and mature of the epistemological beliefs would promote or inhibit the multiple-texts reading comprehension? Second, given the epistemological beliefs includes several different dimensions, were all these dimensions associated with the multiple-texts reading comprehension? And if not, which dimensions relevant? Which has nothing to do? Third, if the epistemological beliefs truly influenced the multiple-texts reading comprehension. How which path did this influence pass through? Direct path or indirect path?To answer these questions, the research methods of quasi-experimental and survey were used. So we could collected data of the epistemological beliefs, prior knowledge, reading motivation, reading strategies, reading goals, as well as the multiple-texts reading comprehension. The results and data obtained were analysis by ANOVA, correlation analysis, hierarchical regression, and path analysis, which could clarify the links between the epistemological beliefs and the multiple-texts reading comprehension.In study 1, we combined the theory and structure of epistemological beliefs raised by Hofer and Pintrich’s (1997), and the theory of topic level of the combined epistemological beliefs raised proposed by Braten et al., (2009). So we compiled the epistemological beliefs questionnaire with the topic of cell phone radiation. By testing the reliability and validity and deleting some items, we were basically formed the Topic-Specific Epistemological Beliefs Questionnaire. The Questionnaire contains two dimensions about the nature of knowledge, namely simplicity of knowledge and certainty of knowledge, and also contains two dimensions about the nature of knowing, namely source of knowledge and justification of knowing.In study 2, we grouped the different levels of each dimension in the epistemological beliefs, and used the SVT, Intra IVT and Inter IVT tasks to reflect the level of the multiple-texts reading comprehension. We used ANOVA and correlation analysis to explore the differences in the epistemological beliefs for the multiple-texts reading comprehension. The results proved that the epistemological beliefs truly influenced the multiple-texts reading comprehension, in which the different level in source of knowledge affected on Intra IVT and Inter IVT tasks, and the different level in justification of knowing affected on SVT, Intra IVT and Inter IVT tasks.In study 3, we brought in the variable of reading strategies (sourcing) this variable, also with three kinds of justification beliefs (authority justification, personal justification and multiple-source justification) and multiple-texts reading comprehension. The intervening variable analysis was used to explore possible ways of their mutual influence. The results showed the multiple-source justification indirectly effected on the writing task performance by sourcing.In study 4, we explored another way of reading motivation (read-efficacy, reading task value and reading curious), to clarify the paths between of four dimensions of epistemological beliefs and multiple-texts reading comprehension (answer open-questions). The results showed that justification knowing of epistemological beliefs affected reading task value, thereby affected the effort. And ultimately, the indirect effects were tested on the performance of answer open-questions.In study 5, we used pretest-posttest paradigm to compare the varies of four dimensions of epistemological beliefs. Before posttest, individuals were asked to read three texts with different internal relations (conflicts, consistent and interpretation) on same topic (cell phone radiation). The results showed that reading multiple-texts on the same subject could promote the development of epistemological beliefs, making it more complex and more maturity. But the different internal relations of multiple-texts were corresponded to the promotion of different dimensions of epistemological beliefs.In summary, the conclusions of our study:First, a high level of epistemological beliefs can indeed promote multiple-texts reading comprehension; second, this promotion is indirect by way of reading strategies or reading motivations; Third, read multiple-texts, also can raise the level of epistemological beliefs.