View in EDS

Constructed Responses as a Window into Strategic Processing: The Role of Prompts in Multiple-Document Reading

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Constructed Responses as a Window into Strategic Processing: The Role of Prompts in Multiple-Document Reading
Language: English
Authors: Katerina Christhilf (ORCID 0000-0003-3901-8665), Andrew Potter (ORCID 0000-0002-1012-2680), Joseph P. Magliano, Kathryn S. McCarthy, Laura K. Allen, Danielle S. McNamara (ORCID 0000-0001-5869-1420)
Source: Grantee Submission. 2025.
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 27
Publication Date: 2025
Sponsoring Agency: Institute of Education Sciences (ED)
Contract Number: R305A180144
Document Type: Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Reading Processes, Reader Response, Prompting, Reading Strategies, Undergraduate Students, Climate, Protocol Analysis, Metacognition, Information Sources, Evaluation, Reading Comprehension, Reading Skills, Prior Learning, Individual Differences, Reading Tests
Assessment and Survey Identifiers: Gates MacGinitie Reading Tests
DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2025.2578594
Abstract: This study investigates how learners' constructed responses, specifically typed thoughts prompted during multiple-document reading, reveal cognitive strategies used to integrate and make sense of complex information. Undergraduate students (n = 73) read four texts on climate change and generated constructed responses to one of three types of prompts: self-explanation, source evaluation, and think-aloud. Readers' constructed responses were coded and analyzed for evidence of key comprehension strategies: paraphrasing, bridging, elaboration, source evaluation, and comprehension monitoring. Results revealed that self-explanation prompts promoted paraphrasing and bridging; source evaluation prompts encouraged bridging, elaboration, and sourcing; and think-aloud prompts supported comprehension monitoring. Although only comprehension monitoring predicted improved performance on multiple-document comprehension measures, the constructed responses nonetheless provided a window into students' strategic processes while reading. Insights gleaned from the constructed responses highlight their unique power to reveal the mental processes that underlie reading comprehension and to inform the design of more effective instructional scaffolds. [This is the online first version of an article published in "Discourse Processes" (ISSN 0163-853X, EISSN 1532-6950).]
Abstractor: As Provided
Notes: https://osf.io/f8en2
IES Funded: Yes
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: ED677248
Database: ERIC
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: ED677248
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Report
PubTypeId: report
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Constructed Responses as a Window into Strategic Processing: The Role of Prompts in Multiple-Document Reading
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Katerina+Christhilf%22">Katerina Christhilf</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3901-8665">0000-0003-3901-8665</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Andrew+Potter%22">Andrew Potter</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1012-2680">0000-0002-1012-2680</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Joseph+P%2E+Magliano%22">Joseph P. Magliano</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kathryn+S%2E+McCarthy%22">Kathryn S. McCarthy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Laura+K%2E+Allen%22">Laura K. Allen</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Danielle+S%2E+McNamara%22">Danielle S. McNamara</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5869-1420">0000-0001-5869-1420</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Grantee+Submission%22"><i>Grantee Submission</i></searchLink>. 2025.
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 27
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: SourceSuprt
  Label: Sponsoring Agency
  Group: SrcSuprt
  Data: Institute of Education Sciences (ED)
– Name: NumberContract
  Label: Contract Number
  Group: NumCntrct
  Data: R305A180144
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reading+Processes%22">Reading Processes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reader+Response%22">Reader Response</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Prompting%22">Prompting</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reading+Strategies%22">Reading Strategies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Undergraduate+Students%22">Undergraduate Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Climate%22">Climate</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Protocol+Analysis%22">Protocol Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Metacognition%22">Metacognition</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Information+Sources%22">Information Sources</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation%22">Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reading+Comprehension%22">Reading Comprehension</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reading+Skills%22">Reading Skills</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Prior+Learning%22">Prior Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Individual+Differences%22">Individual Differences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reading+Tests%22">Reading Tests</searchLink>
– Name: SubjectThesaurus
  Label: Assessment and Survey Identifiers
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22Gates+MacGinitie+Reading+Tests%22">Gates MacGinitie Reading Tests</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/0163853X.2025.2578594
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This study investigates how learners' constructed responses, specifically typed thoughts prompted during multiple-document reading, reveal cognitive strategies used to integrate and make sense of complex information. Undergraduate students (n = 73) read four texts on climate change and generated constructed responses to one of three types of prompts: self-explanation, source evaluation, and think-aloud. Readers' constructed responses were coded and analyzed for evidence of key comprehension strategies: paraphrasing, bridging, elaboration, source evaluation, and comprehension monitoring. Results revealed that self-explanation prompts promoted paraphrasing and bridging; source evaluation prompts encouraged bridging, elaboration, and sourcing; and think-aloud prompts supported comprehension monitoring. Although only comprehension monitoring predicted improved performance on multiple-document comprehension measures, the constructed responses nonetheless provided a window into students' strategic processes while reading. Insights gleaned from the constructed responses highlight their unique power to reveal the mental processes that underlie reading comprehension and to inform the design of more effective instructional scaffolds. [This is the online first version of an article published in "Discourse Processes" (ISSN 0163-853X, EISSN 1532-6950).]
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Note
  Label: Notes
  Group: Note
  Data: https://osf.io/f8en2
– Name: CodeSource
  Label: IES Funded
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Yes
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: ED677248
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=ED677248
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/0163853X.2025.2578594
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 27
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Reading Processes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reader Response
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Prompting
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reading Strategies
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Undergraduate Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Climate
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Protocol Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Metacognition
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Information Sources
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reading Comprehension
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reading Skills
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Prior Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Individual Differences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reading Tests
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Gates MacGinitie Reading Tests
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Constructed Responses as a Window into Strategic Processing: The Role of Prompts in Multiple-Document Reading
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Katerina Christhilf
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Andrew Potter
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Joseph P. Magliano
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kathryn S. McCarthy
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Laura K. Allen
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Danielle S. McNamara
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 12
              M: 11
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Grantee Submission
              Type: main
ResultId 1