부산대학교 도서관

Little evidence is available regarding the differential impact of reading versus reading and writing on multiple source comprehension. The present study aims to: (1) compare the inferential comprehension performance of students in reading versus reading/synthesis conditions; (2) explore the impact of performing the tasks on paper versus on screen with "Read&Answer" (R&A) software; and (3) explore the extent to which rereading, notetaking, and the quality of the written synthesis can explain student's comprehension scores. For the students in the synthesis condition, we also examined the relationship between the quality of the synthesis they produced and the comprehension they achieved. 155 psychology undergraduates were randomly assigned either to the reading (n = 78) or to the reading/synthesis condition (n = 77). From this sample, 79 participants carried out the task with the "Read&Answer" software, and 76 solved the task on paper. All the students took a prior knowledge questionnaire, and read three complementary texts about the conception of intelligence. Students in the reading condition answered an inferential comprehension test, whereas students in the synthesis condition were asked to write a synthesis before taking the same test. Results show no differences in comprehension between students in the four conditions (task and media). There was no significant association between rereading and task condition. However, students in the synthesis condition were more likely to take notes. We found that two of the categories for the quality of the synthesis, textual organization and accuracy of content had an impact on inferential comprehension for the participants who wrote it. The quality of the synthesis mediated between student's prior knowledge and inferential comprehension.