EXPRESS: The Effects of Experimentally Induced Emotions on Revising Common Vaccine Misconceptions

Knowledge revision is the process of updating incorrect prior knowledge in light of new, correct information. Although theoretical and empirical knowledge has advanced regarding the cognitive processes involved in revision, less is known about the role of emotions, which have shown inconsistent relations with key revision processes. The present study examined the effects of experimentally induced emotions on online and offline knowledge revision of vaccination misconceptions. Before reading refutation and non-refutation texts, 96 individuals received either a positive, negative, or no emotion induction. Findings showed that negative emotions, more than positive emotions, resulted in enhanced knowledge revision as indicated by greater ease of integrating correct information during reading and higher comprehension test scores after reading. Findings are discussed with respect to contemporary frameworks of knowledge revision and emotion in reading comprehension and implications for educational practice.

Does Individual Knowledge Management in Online Education Prepare Business Students for Employability in Online Businesses?

Business education has been currently challenged by the fast introduction of online learning platforms for students enrolled in higher education who had been previously used only face-to-face interaction, raising questions about the sustainability of online education. This new learning environment creates a different path for students managing their knowledge, who, due to the influence of online experiences, could develop different skills with different outcomes for their chances of employment. This study analyses knowledge management of business students in an online education setting to discover its influence on students’ perception of both their general employment chances, and specifically in online businesses. To conduct the study, we opted for a quantitative research design based on a questionnaire applied between November and December of 2020, which resulted in valid responses from 256 Bachelor’s and Master’s Degree students. In line with the research hypotheses, correlation, reliability tests and logistic regression were used to perform data analysis. The results clearly indicate that students’ perception of their employment chances depend on the increasing score of knowledge acquisition, knowledge revision, conceptual change and knowledge application, independently and under the action of control variables. Additionally, knowledge application proved to be an important determinant for students’ perception of their employment chances in online businesses.

The effects of positive and negative emotional text content on knowledge revision

Across three experiments, we sought to determine the effects of positive and negative emotional content in refutation texts on misconceptions about vaccines. The addition of negative emotional content to texts that identify, refute, and explain vaccine misconceptions improved knowledge revision observed during reading (Experiment 1). However, the addition of positive emotional content to refutation texts weakened this effect (Experiment 2). A direct comparison between negative and positive emotional content provided corroborating evidence for these findings (Experiment 3). Across experiments, results show that all refutation texts (with or without positive or negative emotional content) improved learning assessed after reading. These findings show the differential effects of emotional content on processing misconceptions about an important socio-scientific topic and provide consistent support for refutation texts as a potentially useful tool in these corrective efforts.

Reading Comprehension

Reading comprehension requires the construction of a coherent mental representation of the information in a text. Reading involves three interrelated elements—the reader, the text, and the activity, all situated into a broader sociocultural context. The complexity inherent in reading comprehension has given rise to a multitude of influential models and frameworks that attempt to account for the various processes that give rise to reading comprehension: for example, activation of prior knowledge and integration of incoming information with currently active memory contents. Other models and frameworks attempt to account for the components that constitute reading comprehension, such as decoding, vocabulary, and language comprehension. Many of the most prominent models of reading comprehension describe single readers engaging with single texts. Several recent models attempt to account for the additional complexity of comprehending multiple texts. Along with engaging in comprehension of multiple texts comes the need to contend with multiple information sources (i.e., sourcing). As such, researchers have developed models and frameworks to capture the processes learners engage in when the need to engage in sourcing arises, such as when readers encounter conflicting information. Much theorizing in the reading comprehension literature has implicated typical readers, which suggests that many models and frameworks may not represent all readers across various skill levels. Existing research has identified several sources of individual differences in reading comprehension that in part determine the success of comprehension processes. Such individual differences include working memory, executive functions, vocabulary, inferencing, and prior knowledge. Prior knowledge is particularly important because of its power to both facilitate and interfere with comprehension processes. As such, the need to overcome the disruptive influence of incorrect prior knowledge (i.e., knowledge revision) becomes especially important when readers encounter information that conflicts with that prior knowledge.

The Effects of Positive and Negative Emotions on Knowledge Revision

Across three experiments, we sought to determine the effects of positive and negative emotional content in refutation texts on correcting controversial misconceptions about vaccines. The addition of negative emotional content to texts that identify, refute and explain vaccine misconceptions improved knowledge revision observed during reading (Experiment 1). However, the addition of positive emotional content to refutation texts weakened this effect (Experiment 2). A direct comparison between negative and positive emotional content provided corroborating evidence for these findings (Experiment 3). Across experiments, results show that all refutation texts (with or without positive or negative emotional content) improved learning assessed after reading. These findings show the differential effects of emotional content on revising misconceptions about a controversial topic and provide consistent support for refutation texts as an effective tool in these corrective efforts.