Andreassen, R., Brten, I. (2012).

Teachers source evaluation self-efficacy predicts their use of relevant source features when evaluating the trustworthiness of web sources on special education. British Journal of Educational Technology. DOI: 10.1111/j.14678535.2012.01366.x Banas, S., Sanchez, C. (2012). Working memory capacity and learning underlying conceptual relationships across multiple documents. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(4), 594-600. DOI: 10.1002/acp.2834 Bigot, L., Rouet, JF. (2007). The impact of presentation format, task assignment, and prior knowledge on students comprehension of multiple online documents. Journal of Literacy Research, 39(4), 445-470. DOI: 10.1080/10862960701675317 Braasch, JL., Rouet, JF., Vibert, N., Britt, M. (2012). Readers use of source information in text comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 40(3), 450-465. DOI: 10.3758/s13421-011-0160-6 Brand-Gruwel, S., & Wopereis, I. (2006). Integration of the information problem-solving skill in an educational programme: The effects of learning with authentic tasks. Technology, Instruction, Cognition, and Learning, 4, 243-263. DOI: Brand-Gruwel, S., Wopereis, I., Vermetten, Y. (2005). Information problem solving by experts and novices: analysis of a complex cognitive skill. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(3), 487-508. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2004.10.005 Brten, I., Ferguson, L., Anmarkrud, ., Strms, H. (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. DOI: 10.1007/s11145-012-9371-x Brten, I., Ferguson, L., Anmarkrud, ., Strms, H. (2012). Students working with multiple conflicting documents on a scientific issue: regulations between epistemic cognition while reading and sourcing and argumentation in essays. British Journal of Educational Psychology. DOI: 10.1111/bjep.12005 Brten, I., Ferguson, L., Strms, H., Anmarkrud, . (2012). Justification beliefs and multiple-documents comprehension. European Journal of Psychology of Education. DOI: 10.1007/s10212-012-0145-2 Brten, I., Strms, H. (2003). A longitudeinal think-aloud study of spontaneous strategic processing during the reading of multiple expository texts. Reading and Writing, 16(3), 195-218. DOI: Brten, I., Strms, H. (2006). Constructing meaning from multiple information sources as a function of personal epistemology. Information Design Journal, 14(1), 56-67. DOI: 10.1075/idj.14.1.07bra Brten, I., Strms, H. (2006). Effects of personal epistemology on understanding of multiple texts. Reading Psychology, 27(5), 457-484. DOI: 10.1080/02702710600848031

Brten, I., Strms, H. (2009). Effects of task instruction and personal epistemology on the understanding of multiple texts about climate change. Discourse Processes, 47(1), 1-31. DOI: 10.1080/01638530902959646 Brten, I., Strms, H. (2011). Measuring strategic processing when students read multiple texts. Metacognition and Learning, 6(2), 111-130. DOI: 10.1007/s11409-011-9075-7 Brten, I., Strms, H. (2010). When law students read multiple documents about global warming: examining the role of topic-specific beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing. Instructional Science, 38(6), 635-657. DOI: 10.1007/s11251-008-9091-4 Brten, I., Strms, H., Britt, M. (2009). Trust matters: examining the role of source evaluation in students construction of meaning within and across multiple texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 44, 6-28. DOI: 10.1598/RRQ.44.1.1 Brten, I., Strms, H., Britt, M. (2010). Reading multiple texts about climate change: the relationship between memory for sources and text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 20(3), 192-204. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.001 Brten, I., Strms, H., Salmern, L. (2011). Trust and mistrust when students read multiple information sources about climate change. Learning and Instruction, 21(2), 180-192. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.02.002 Brten, I., Strms, H., Samuelstuen, M. (2008). Are sophisticated students always better? The role of topic-specific personal epistemology in the understanding of multiple expository texts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 814-840. DOI: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.02.001 Britt, M., Aglinskas, C. (2002). Improving students ability to identify and use source information. Cognition and Instruction, 20(4), 485-522. DOI: 10.1207/S1532690XCI2004_2 Britt, M., Sommer, J. (2010). Facilitating textual integration with macro-structure focusing tasks. Reading Psychology, 25(4), 313-339. DOI: 10.1080/02702710490522658 Buchs, C., Gilles, I., Dutrvis, M., Butera, F. (2011). Pressure to cooperate: Is positive reward interdependence really needed in cooperative learning? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 135-146. DOI: 10.1348/000709910X504799 Cerdn, R., Vidal-Abarca, E. (2008). The effects of tasks on integrating information from multiple documents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 209-222. DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.209 De La Paz, S., Felton, M. (2010). Reading and writing from multiple source documents in history: Effects of strategy instruction with low to average high school writers. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(3), 174-192. DOI: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.03.001

Ferguson, L., Brten, I. (2013). Student profiles of knowledge and epistemic beliefs: changes and relations to multiple-text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 25, 49-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.11.003 Ferguson, L., Brten, I., Strms, H. (2012). Epistemic cognition when students read multiple documents containing conflicting scientific evidence: A think-aloud study. Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 103-120. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.08.002 Gerjets, P., Kammerer, Y., Werner, B. (2011). Measuring spontaneous and instructed evaluation processes during Web search: Integrating concurrent thinking-aloud protocols and eye-tracking data. Learning and Instruction, 21(2), 220-231. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.02.005 Gil, L., Brten, I., Vidal-Abarca, E., Strms, H. (2010). Summary versus argument tasks when working with multiple documents: which is better for whom? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(3), 157-173. DOI: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.11.002 Gil, L., Brten, I., Vidal-Abarca, E., Strms, H. (2010). Understanding and integrating multiple science texts: summary tasks are sometimes better than argument tasks. Reading Psychology, 31, 30-68. DOI: 10.1080/02702710902733600 Graesser, A., Bertus, E. (1998). Construction of causal inferences while reading expository texts on science and technology. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2(3), 247-269. DOI: 10.1207/s1532799xssr0203_4 Hagen, A., Braasch, J., Brten, I. (2012). Relationships between spontaneous note-taking, self-reported strategies and comprehension when reading multiple texts in different task conditions. Journal of Research in Reading. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2012.01536.x Hynd, C., Holschuh, J., Hubbard, B. (2004). Thinking like a historian: college students reading of multiple historical documents. Journal of Literacy Research, 36(2), 141-176. DOI: 10.1207/s15548430jlr3602_2 Kammerer, Y., Brten, I., Gerjets, P., Strms, H. (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. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.012 Kienhues, D., Stadtler, M., Bromme, R. (2011). Dealing with conflicting or consistent medical information on the web: When expert information breeds laypersons doubts about experts. Learning and Instruction, 21(2), 193-204. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.02.004 Kobayashi, K. (2009). Comprehension of relations among controversial texts: effects of external strategy use. Instructional Science, 37(4), 311-324. DOI: 10.1007/s11251-0079041-6 Kobayashi, K. (2010). Strategic use of multiple texts for the evaluation of arguments. Reading Psychology, 31(2), 121-149. DOI: 10.1080/02702710902754192

Kobayashi, K. (2009). The influence of topic knowledge, external strategy use, and college experience on students comprehension of controversial texts. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 130-134. DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2008.06.001 Lacroix, N. (1999). Macrostructure construction and organization in the processing of multiple text passages. Instructional Science, 27(3-4), 221-233. DOI: 10.1007/BF00897320 Lesley, M., Watson, P., Elliot, S. (2007) School reading and multiple texts: examining the metacognitive development of secondary-level preservice teachers. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(2), 150-162. DOI: 10.1598/JAAL.51.2.6 Mason, L., Ariasi, N., Boldrin, A. Epistemic beliefs in action: Spontaneous reflections about knowledge and knowing during online information searching their influence on learning. Learning and Instruction, 21(1), 137-151. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.01.001 Mason, L., Boldrin, A., Ariasi, N. (2010). Epistemic metacognition in context: evaluating and learning online information. Metacognition and Learning, 5(1), 67-90. DOI: 10.1007/s11409-009-9048-2 Mason, L., Boldrin, A., Ariasi, N. (2010). Searching the Web to learn about a controversial topic: are students epistemically active? Instructional Science, 38(6), 607-633. DOI: 10.1007/s11251-008-9089-y Naumann, A., Brunstein, A., Krems, J. (2007). DEWEX: A system for designing and conducting Web-based experiments. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 248-258. DOI: 10.3758/BF03193155 Naumann, A., Wechsung, I., Krems, J. (2009). How to support learning from multiple hypertext sources. Behavior Research Methods, 41(3), 639-646. DOI: 10.3758/BRM.41.3.639 Nokes, J., Dole, J., Hacker, D. (2007). Teaching high school students to use heuristics while reading historical texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 492-503. DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663 Payne, S., Reader, W. (2006). Constructing structure maps of multiple on-line texts. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(5), 461-474. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.09.003 Reader, W., Payne, S. (2007). Allocating time across multiple texts: sampling and satisficing. Human-Computer Interaction, 22(3), 263-298. DOI: 10.1080/07370020701493376 Rouet, J.F., Favart, M., Britt, M., Perfetti, C. (1997). Studying and using multiple documents in history: effects of discipline expertise. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 85-106. DOI: 10.1207/s1532690xci1501_3 Rouet, J. F., Britt, M. A., Mason, R. A., & Perfetti, C. A. (1996). Using multiple sources of evidence to reason about history. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(3), 478-493.

Salmern, L., Gil, L., Brten, I. Strms, H. (2010). Comprehension effects of signaling relationships between documents in search engines. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(3), 419-426. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2009.11.013 Stadtler, M., Bromme, R. (2007). Dealing with multiple documents on the WWW: The role of metacognition in the formation of documents models. International Journal of ComputerSupported Collaborative Learning, 2(2-3), 191-210. DOI: 10.1007/s11412-007-9015-3 Stadtler, M., Bromme, R. (2008). Effects of the metacognitive computer tool met.a.ware on the web search of laypersons. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 716-737. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2007.01.023 Stahl, S., Hynd, C., Britton, B., McNish, M., Bosquet, D. (1996). What happens when students read multiple source documents in history? Reading Research Quarterly, 31(4), 430-456. DOI: 10.1598/RRQ.31.4.5 Strms, H., Brten, I. (2009). Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and multiple-test comprehension among upper secondary students. Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 29(4), 425-445. DOI: 10.1080/01443410903046864 Strms, H., Brten, I. (2002). Norwegian law students use of multiple sources while reading expository texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 37(@), 208-227. DOI: 10.1598/RRQ.37.2.5 Strms, H., Brten, I., Britt, A. (2011). Do students beliefs about knowledge and knowing predict their judgment of texts trustworthiness? Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 31(2), 177-206. DOI: 10.1080/01443410.2010.538039 Strms, H., Brten, I., Samuelstuen, M. (2009). Dimensions of topic-specific epistemological beliefs as predictors of multiple text understanding. Learning and Instruction, 18)6), 513-527. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.11.001 Strms, H., Brten, I., Samuelstuen, M. (2003). Students strategic use of multiple sources during expository text reading: a longitudinal think-aloud study. Cogntion and Instruction, 21(2), 113-147. DOI: 10.1207/S1532690XCI2102_01 Taylor, A. (2011). Students learn equally well from digital as from paperbound texts. Teaching of Psychology, 38(4), 278-281. DOI: 10.1177/0098628311421330 VanSledright, B., Kelly, C. (1998). Reading American history: the influence of multiple sources on six fifth graders. Elementary School Journal, 98(3), 239-265. DOI: Wallace, R., Kupperman, J., Krajcik, J., Soloway, E. (2000). Science on the Web: Students online in a sixth-grade classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 75-104. DOI: 10.1207/s15327809jls0901_5

Walraven, A., Brand-Gruwel, S., Boshuizen, H. (2009). How students evaluate information and sources when searching the World Wide Web for information. Computers & Education, 52(1), 234-246. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.003 Wiley, J., & Voss, J. F. (1999). Constructing Arguments From Multiple Sources: Tasks That Promote Understanding and Not Just Memory for Text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 301-311. DOI: Wolfe, M., Goldman, S. (2005). Relations between adolescents text processing and reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 23(4), 467-502. DOI: 10.1207/s1532690xci2304_2 Wopereis, I., Brand-Gruwel, S., Vermetten, Y. (2008). The effect of embedded instruction on solving information problems. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 738-752. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2007.01.024 Woporeis, I., Merrinboer, J. (2011). Evaluating text-based information on the World Wide Web. Learning and Instruction, 21(2), 232-237. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.02.003 Yrk, N. (2007). The effect of supplementing instruction with conceptual change texts on students conceptions of electrochemical cells. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(6), 515-523. DOI: 10.1007/s10956-007-9076-0