Main Article Content
This study investigated how four 10th-grade students with dyslexia processed and integrated information across web pages and representations when learning in a multiple source multimedia context. Eye movement data showed that participants’ processing of the materials varied with respect to their initial exploration of the web pages, their overall processing time, and the linearity of their processing patterns, with post-learning interviews indicating the deliberate, strategic considerations underlying each participant’s processing pattern. Eye movement data in terms of fixation duration and percentage of regressions also corroborated the findings of formal, diagnostic assessments. Finally, it was found that participants differed with respect to how much factual information they learned from working with the materials and how well they were able to integrate information across the web pages and representations, with results suggesting particular problems with learning factual information and, at the same time, constructing a coherent mental representation of the issue, as well as with drawing on textual information in the integration process. This study brings together two research areas that essentially have been kept apart in theory and research, that is, dyslexia and multimedia learning, and it provides unique information about the role of individual differences in multiple source multimedia contexts.
FLR adopts the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs Creative Common License (BY-NC-ND). That is, Copyright for articles published in this journal is retained by the authors with, however, first publication rights granted to the journal. By virtue of their appearance in this open access journal, articles are free to use, with proper attribution, in educational and other non-commercial settings.
Abtahi, M.S. (2012). Interactive multimedia learning object (IMLO) for dyslexic children. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 1206-1210. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.801
Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P.D., & Paris, S.G. (2008). Clarifying differences between reading skills and reading strategies. The Reading Teacher, 61, 364-373. doi:10.1598/RT.61.5.1
Ainsworth, S. (2018). Multiple representations and multimedia learning. In F. Fischer, C.E. Hmelo-Silver, S.R. Goldman, & P. Reiman (Eds.), International handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 96-105). New York: Routledge.
Alty, J. L., Al‐Sharrah, A., & Beacham, N. (2006). When humans form media and media form humans: An experimental study examining the effects different digital media have on the learning outcomes of students who have different learning styles. Interacting with Computers, 18, 891–909. doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2006.04.002
Anderson, T.H., & Ambruster, B.B. (1984). Studying. In P.D. Pearson, M. Kamil, R. Barr, & P. Rosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (1st ed., pp. 657–679). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Andresen, A., Anmarkrud, Ø., & Bråten, I. (2019). Investigating multiple source use among students with and without dyslexia. Reading and Writing, 32, 1149-1174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9904-z
Anmarkrud, Ø., Brante, E.W., & Andresen, A. (2018). Potential processing challenges of Internet use among readers with dyslexia. In J.L.G. Braasch, I. Bråten, & M.T. McCrudden (Eds.), Handbook of multiple source use (pp. 117-132). New York: Routledge.
Anmarkrud, Ø., & Ferguson, L.E. (2011). Working memory and topic knowledge of Norwegian 10th and 11th graders. Unpublished data set. Oslo: Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Oslo.
Austin, K.A. ( 2009). Multimedia learning: Cognitive individual differences and display design techniques predict transfer learning with multimedia learning modules. Computers & Education, 53, 1339-1354. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.06.017
Avons, S.E., & Hanna, C. (1995). The memory-span deficit in children with specific reading-disability – is speech rate responsible? British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13, 303-311. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-835X.1995.tb00681.x
Ayres, P., & Sweller, J. (2014). The split-attention principle in multimedia learning. In R.E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 206-226). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Azevedo, R., & Cromley, J.G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students’ learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 523-535. DOI: 10.1037/0022-0622.214.171.1243
Baddeley, A. (1995). Working memory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Baddeley, A.D. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Science, 4, 417-423. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01538-2
Bahnmueller, J., Huber, S., Nuerk, H.C., Göbel, S.M., & Moeller, K. (2016). Processing multi-digit numbers: A translingual eye-tracking study. Psychological Research, 80, 422-433. doi: 10.1007/s00426-015-0729-y
Baker, L., & Beall, L.C. (2009). Metacognitive processes and reading comprehension. In S.E. Israel & G.G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp. 373–388). New York: Routledge.
Barbosa, T., Miranda, M.C., Santos, R.F., & Bueno, O.F.A. (2009). Phonological working memory, phonological awareness, and language in literacy difficulties in Brazilian children. Reading and Writing, 22, 201-218. doi: 10.1007/s11145-007-9109-3
Barzilai, S., & Ka’adan, I. (2017). Learning to integrate divergent information sources: The interplay of epistemic cognition and epistemic metacognition. Metacognition and Learning, 12, 193-232. doi: 10.1007/s11409-016-9165-7
Beacham, N.A., & Alty, J.L. (2006). An investigation into the effects that digital media can have on the learning outcomes of individuals who have dyslexia. Computers & Education, 47, 74-93. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2004.10.006
Berninger, V. W., Raskind, W., Richards, T., Abbott, R., & Stock, P. (2008). A multidisciplinary approach to understanding developmental dyslexia within working-memory architecture: Genotypes, phenotypes, brain, and instruction. Developmental Neuropsychology, 33, 707-744. doi: 10.1080/87565640802418662
Bishop, D.V.M., & Snowling, M.J. (2004). Developmental dyslexia and specific language impairment: Same or different? Psychological Bulletin, 130, 858-886. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.130.6.858
Björnsson, C. H. (1968). Läsbarhet [Readability]. Stockholm: Liber.
Borella, E., Carretti, B., & Pelegrina, S. (2010). The specific role of inhibition in reading comprehension in good and poor comprehenders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 541-552. doi: 10.1177/0022219410371676
Braasch, J.L.G., Bråten, I., Strømsø, H.I., & Anmarkrud, Ø. (2014). Incremental theories of intelligence predict multiple document comprehension. Learning and Individual Differences, 31, 11-20. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2013.12.012
Bråten, I., Anmarkrud, Ø., Brandmo, C., & Strømsø H.I. (2014). Developing and testing a model of direct and indirect relationships between individual differences, processing, and multiple-text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 30, 9-24. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.11.002
Bråten, I., Braasch, J.L.G., & Salmerón, L. (in press). Reading multiple and non-traditional texts: New opportunities and new challenges. In E.B. Moje, P. Afflerbach, P. Enciso, & N.K. Lesaux (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol. V). New York: Routledge.
Butcher, K.R. (2014). The multimedia principle. In R.E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia leraring (2nd ed., pp. 174-205). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Campbell, S. (2012). Comparative case study. In A.J. Mills, G. Durepos, & E. Wiebe (Eds.), Encyclopedia of case study research (pp. 175-176). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Castek, J., Zawilinski, L., McVerry, J.G., O'Byrne, W.I., & Leu, D.J. (2011). The new literacies of online reading comprehension: New opportunities and challenges for students with learning difficulties. In C. Wyatt-Smith, J. Elkins, & S. Gunn (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on difficulties in learning literacy and numeracy (pp. 91-110). New York: Springer.
Chan, E., & Unsworth, L. (2011). Image-language interaction in online reading environments: Challenges for students' reading comprehension. Australian Educational Researcher, 38, 181-202. doi: 10.1007/s13384-011-0023-y
Cho, B.-Y., & Afflerbach, P. (2017). An evolving perspective of constructively responsive reading comprehension strategies in multilayered digital text environments. In S.E. Israel (Ed.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (2nd ed., pp. 109-134). New York: Guilford.
Cho, B.-Y., Afflerbach, P., & Han, H. (2018). Strategic processing in accessing, comprehending, and using multiple sources online. In In J.L.G. Braasch, I. Bråten, & M.T. McCrudden (Eds.), Handbook of multiple source use (pp. 133-150). New York: Routledge.
Cho, B.-Y., Woodward, L., & Li, D. (2017). Examining adolescents' strategic processing during online reading with a question generating task. American Educational Research Journal, 54, 691-724. doi: 10.3102/0002831217701694
Clark, J.M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3, 149-210. doi: 10.1007/BF01320076
Corriveau, K.H., Einav, S., Robinson, E.J., & Harris, P.L. (2014). To the letter: Early readers trust print-based over oral instructions to guide their actions. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 32, 345-358. doi: 10.1111/bjdp.12046
Cuevas , H.M., Fiore , S.M., & Oser, R.L. (2002). Scaffolding cognitive and metacognitive processes in low verbal ability learners: Use of diagrams in computer based training environments. Instructional Science, 30, 433–464. doi: 10.1023/A:1020516301541
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P.A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450-466. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6
de Olivera, D.G., da Silva, P.B., Dias, N.M., Sebra, A.G., & Macedo, E.C. (2014). Reading component skills in dyslexia: Word recognition, comprehension, and processing speed. Frontiers in Psychology, 5: 1339. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01339
DeSchryver, M. (2015). Higher order thinking in an online world: Toward a theory of web-mediated knowledge synthesis. Teachers College Record, 116, 1-44. http://www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 17692
Einav, S., Robinson, E.J., & Fox, A. (2012). Take it as read: Origins of trust in knowledge gained from print. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 114, 262-274. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2012.09.016
Eitel, A., & Scheiter, K. (2015). Picture or text ﬁrst? Explaining sequence effects when learning with pictures and text. Educational Psychology Review, 27,153–180. doi: 10.1007/s10648-014-9264-4
Eitel, A., Scheiter, K., & Schüler, A. (2013). How inspecting a picture affects processing of text in multimedia learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27, 451–461. doi: 10.1002/acp.2922
Eitel, A., Scheiter, K., Schüler, A., Nyström, M., & Holmqvist, K. (2013). How a picture facilitates the process of learning from text: Evidence for scaffolding. Learning and Instruction, 28, 48–63. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.05.002
Eyden, J., Robinson, E.J., Einav, S., & Jaswal, V.K. (2013). The power of print: Children’s trust in unexpected printed suggestions. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 116, 593-608. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2013.06.012
Fenesi, B., Kramer, E., & Kim, J.A. (2016). Split-attention and coherence principles in multimedia instruction can rescue performance for learners with lower working memory capacity. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30, 691-699. doi: 10.1002/acp.3244
Ferguson, L.E., & Bråten, 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
Fischbach, A., Könen, T., Rietz, C. S., & Hasselhorn, M. (2014). What is not working in working memory of children with literacy disorders? Evidence from a three-year-longitudinal study. Reading and Writing, 27, 267-286. doi: 10.1007/s11145-013-9444-5
Follmer, D. J. (2018). Executive function and reading comprehension: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychologist, 53, 42-60. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2017.1309295
Fox, E., & Alexander, P.A. (2017). Text and comprehension. In S.E. Israel (Ed.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (2nd ed., pp. 335-352). New York: Guilford.
Furnes, B., & Norman, E. (2015). Metacognition and reading: Comparing three forms of metacognition in normally developing readers and readers with dyslexia. Dyslexia, 21, 273-284. doi: 10.1002/dys.1501
Gathercole, S.E., Alloway, T.P., Willis, C., & Adams, A.-M. (2006). Working memory in children with reading disabilities. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 93, 265-281. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2005.08.003
Gerjets, P., Scheiter, K., Opfermann, M., Hesse, F.W., & Eysink, T.H. (2009). Learning with hypermedia: The influence of representational formats and different levels of learner control on performance and learning behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 360–370. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.015
Greene, J.A., Moos, D.C., Azevedo, R., & Winters, F.I. (2008). Exploring differences between gifted and grade-level students’ use of self-regulatory learning processes with hypermedia. Computers & Education, 50, 1069-1083. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.10.004
Harm, M.V., & Seidenberg, M.S. (1999). Phonology, reading acquisition, and dyslexia: Insights from connectionist models. Psychological Review, 106, 491-528. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.106.3.491
Hegarty, M., & Just, M.A. (1993). Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. Journal of Memory and Language, 32,717–742. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1993.1036
Henry, L.A., Castek, J., O'Byrne, W.I., & Zawilinski, L. (2012). Using peer collaboration to support online reading, writing, and communication: An empowerment model for struggling readers. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28, 279-306. doi: 10.1080/10573569.2012.676431
Høien, T. (2014). Logos - Teoribasert diagnostisering av lesevansker [Logos - Theory based assessment of reading difficulties]. Bryne, Norway: Logometrica.
Hulme, C., & Snowling, M. J. (2009). Developmental disorders of language learning and cognition. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Irrazabal, N., Saux, G., & Burin, D. (2016). Procedural multimedia presentations: The effects of working memory and task complexity on instruction time and assembly accuracy. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30, 1052-1060. doi: 10.1002/acp.3299
Jeffries, S., & Everatt, J. (2004). Working memory: Its role in dyslexia and other specific learning disabilities. Dyslexia, 10, 196-214. doi: 10.1002/dys.278
Johnson, C.I., & Mayer, R.E. (2012). An eye movement analysis of the spatial contiguity effect in multimedia learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 18, 178-179. doi: 10.1037/a0026923
Just, M.A., & Carpenter, P.A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99, 122-149. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.99.1.122
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. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.07.001
Kingsley, T., & Tancock, S. (2013). Internet inquiry: Fundamental competencies for online comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 67, 389-399. doi: 10.1002/TRTR.1223
Klinkenberg, J.E., & Skaar, E. (2003). STAS: Standardisert test i avkoding og staving [STAS: Standarized test of decoding and spelling]. Hønefoss, Norway: Ringerike PPT.
Knoop-van Campen, C.A.N., Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2018). The modality and redundancy effects in multimedia learning in children with dyslexia. Dyslexia, 24, 140-155. doi: 10.1002/dys.1585
Kurby, C.A., Britt, M.A., & Magliano, J.P. (2005). The role of top-down and bottom-up processes in between-text integration. Reading Psychology, 26, 335–362. doi: 10.1080/02702710500285870
Leu, D.J., Kiili, C., & Forzani, E. (2016). Infividual differences in the new literacies of online research and comprehension. In P. Afflerbach (Ed.), Handbook of individual differences in reading (pp. 259-272). New York: Routledge.
Lyon, G.R., Shaywitz, S.E., & Shaywitz, B.A. (2003). A definition of dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 53, 1-14. doi: 10.1007/s11881-003-0001-9
MacCullagh, L., Bosanquet, A., & Badcock, N. (2017). University students with dyslexia: A qualitative exploratory study of learning practices, challenges, and strategies. Dyslexia, 23, 3-23. doi: 10.1002/dys.1544
Mason, L., Junyent, A.A., & Tornatora, M.C. (2014). Epistemic evaluation and comprehension of web-source information on controversial science-related topics: Effects of a short-term instructional intervention. Computers & Education, 76, 143-157. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.03.016
Mason, L., Pluchino, P., & Tornatora, M.C. (2016). Using eye-tracking technology as an indirect instruction tool to improve text and picture processing and learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47, 1083-1095. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12271
Mason, L., Scheiter, K., & Tornatora, M.C. (2017). Using eye-movements to model the sequence of text-picture processing for multimedia comprehension. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33, 443-460. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12191
Mayer, R.E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R.E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13, 125-139. doi: 10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00016-6
Mayer, R.E. (2014a). Introduction to multimedia learning. In R.E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 1-24). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R.E. (2014b). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R.E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 43-71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R.E. (Ed.) (2014c), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R.E., Heiser, H., & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 187-198. doi: 10 1037i/0022-0663 93.1 187
Mayer, R.E., & Moreno, R. (2010). Techniques that reduce extraneous cognitive load and manage intrinsic cognitive load during multimedia learning. In J.L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Cognitive load theory (131-152). New York: Cambridge University Press.
McCarthy, J.E., & Swierenga, S.J. (2010). What we know about dyslexia and Web accessibility: A research review. Universal Access in the Information Society, 9, 147-152. doi: 10.1007/s10209-009-0160-5
Melby-Lervåg, M., Lyster, S.A.H., & Hulme, C. (2012). Phonologival skills and their role in learning to read: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 322-352. doi: 10.1037/a0026744
Menghini, D., Finzi, A., Carlesimo, G. A., & Vicari, S. (2011). Working memory impairment in children with developmental dyslexia: Is it just a phonological deficity? Developmental Neuropsychology, 36, 199-213. doi: 10.1080/87565641.2010.549868
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R.E. (2000). Engaging students in active learning: The case for personalized multimedia messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 724-733. DOI: 10.1037//0022-06M.92.4.724
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R.E. (2002). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 156-163. doi: 10.1037//0022-06126.96.36.199
Myers, J.L., & O'Brien, E.J. (1998). Accessing the discourse during reading. Discourse Processes, 26, 131-157. doi: 10.1080/01638539809545042
Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Oxford University Press.
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual-coding approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
Pociask, F.D., & Morrison, G.R. (2008). Controlling split attention and redundancy in physical therapy instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56, 379–399. doi: 10.1007/s11423-007-9062-5
Prado, C., Dubois, M., & Valdois, S. (2007). The eye movements of dyslexic children during reading and visual search: Impact of the visual attention span. Vision Research, 47, 2521-2530. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2007.06.001
Ramus, F., Rosen, S., Dakin, S.C., Day, B.L., Castellote, J.M., White, S., & Frith, U. (2003). Theories of developmental dyslexia: Insights from a multiple case study of dyslexic adults. Brain, 126, 841-865. doi: 10.1093/brain/awg076
Rau, A.K., Moll, K., Snowling, M.J., & Landerl, K. (2015). Effects of orthographic consistency on eye movement behavior: German and English children and adults process the same words differently. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 130, 92-105. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2014.09.012
Rayner, K., Ardoin, S.P., & Binder, K.S. (2013). Children's eye movements in reading: A commentary. School Psychology Review, 42, 223-233.
Rayner, K., Chace, K.H., Slattery, T.J., & Ashby, J. (2006). Eye movements as reflections of comprehension processes in reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 241-255. doi: 10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_3
Rieber , L.P., Tzeng, S.-C., & Tribble, K. (2004). Discovery learning, representation, and explanation within a computer-based simulation: Finding the right mix. Learning and Instruction, 14, 307–323. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.008
Roca, J., Tejero, P., & Insa, B. (2018). Accident ahead? Difficulties of drivers with and without reading impairment recognizing words and pictograms in variable message signs. Applied Ergonomics, 67, 83-90. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2017.09.013
Roeschl-Heils, A., Schneider, W., & van Kraayenoord, C.E. (2003). Reading, metacognition, and motivation: A follow-up study of German students in grades 7 and 8. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 18, 75–86. doi: 10.1007/BF03173605
Rouet, J.-F., & Britt, M.A. (2014). Multimedia learning from multiple documents. In R.E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 813-841). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rukavina, I., & Daneman, M. (1996). Integration and its effect on acquiring knowledge about competing scientific theories from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 272-287. doi: 10.1037/0022-06188.8.131.522
Salmerón, L., Strømsø, H.I., Kammerer, Y., Stadtler, M., & van den Broek, P. (2018). Comprehension processes in digital reading. In M. Barzillai, J. Thomson, S. Schroeder, & P. van den Broek (Eds.), Learning to read in a digital world (pp. 91-120). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Schneider, W. (2011). Memory development in childhood. In U. Goswami (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development (2nd ed., pp. 347-376). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Schneps, M.H., Thomson, J.M., Chen, C., Sonnert, G., & Pomplum, M. (2013). E-readers are more effective than paper for some with dyslexia. PLoS ONE, 8, e75634. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075634
Schotter, E.R., Tran, R., & Rayner, K. (2014). Don’t believe what you read (only once): Comprehension is supported by regressions during reading. Psychological Science, 25, 1218-1226. doi: 10.1177/0956797614531148
Schüler, A., Scheiter, K., & van Genuchten, E. (2011). The role of working memory in multimedia instruction: Is working memory working during learning from text and pictures? Educational Psychology Review, 23, 389-411. doi: 10.1007/s10648-011-9168-5
Shaywitz, S.E., & Shaywitz, B.A. (2008). Paying attention to reading: The neurobiology of reading and dyslexia. Development and Psychopathology, 20, 1329-1349. doi: 10.1017/S0954579408000631
Smith-Spark, J.H., & Fisk, J.E. (2007). Working memory functioning in developmental dyslexia. Memory, 15, 34-56. doi: 10.1080/09658210601043384
Stanovich, K.E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acuistion of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360-407. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.21.4.1
Swanson, H.L., & Trahan, M.F. (1992). Learning disabled readers' comprehension of computer mediated text: The influence of working memory, metacognition, and attribution. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 7, 74-86.
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York: Springer.
Taylor, M., Duffy, S., & Hughes, G. (2007). The use of animation in higher education teaching to support students with dyslexia. Education + Training, 49, 25-35. doi: 10.1108/00400910710729857
Torcasio, S., & Sweller, J. (2010). The use of illustrations when learning to read: A cognitive load theory approach. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24, 659–672. doi: 10.1002/acp.1577
Torgersen, J.K. (2001). The theory and practice of intervention: Comparing outcomes from prevention and remediation studies. In A. Fawcett & R. Nicolson (Eds.), Dyslexia: Theory and good practice (pp. 185-201). London: Fulton.
Torgersen, J.K., Alexander, A.W., Wagner, R.K., Rashotte, C.A., Voeller, K., Conway, T., et al. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33-58. doi: 10.1177/002221940103400104
Trakhman, L.M.S., Alexander, P.A., & Berkowitz, L.E. (in press). Effects of processing time on comprehension and calibration in print and digital mediums. The Journal of Experimental Education. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1080/00220973.2017.1411877
Van de Vijver, F.J., & Harsveld, M. (1994). The incomplete equivalence of the paper-and-pencil and computerized versions of the General Aptitude Test Battery. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 852–859. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.79.6.852
Van Roy, B. & Pretorius, E.J (2013). Is reading in an agglutinating language different from an analytic language? An analysis of isiZulu and English reading based on eye movements. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 31, 281-297. doi: 10.2989/16073614.2013.837603
Van Strien, J.L.H., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Boshuizen, H.P.A. (2014). Dealing with conflicting information from multiple nonlinear texts: Effects of prior attitudes. Computers in Human Behavior, 32, 101-111. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.11.021
Vinje, F.E. (1982). Journalistspråket [The journalist language]. Fredrikstad, Norway: Institute for Journalism.
Yin, R.K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.