| dc.description.abstract | Both empirical and theoretical work in the field of personal epistemologies has indicated several epistemic factors that influence the way in which individuals approach information and knowledge formation. An organizational scheme is suggested for making sense of the various approaches to personal epistemologies and an integrative model of epistemic cognition that combines these elements along with contextual influences is proposed. Using a sample of 84 undergraduate and graduate students, 18 to 41 years of age, a mixed method approach was employed to begin investigations into the theoretical model. In an online information-seeking scenario on the, scientifically controversial but morally and politically neutral, topic of hand sanitizer, participants' initial thoughts on the topic were captured with Likert-type survey items and their online behaviors tracked using Internet logfile data. Follow-up open response survey items questioned participants on their approaches to the sources of information and for justification of the opinions they formed after having access to the information. Survey data were also collected on each of the proposed components at the individual level of the model: epistemic strategies, development, and motivations. Using regression and multiple mediation analyses the connections between contextual factors and individual and task-specific epistemic factors were explored. This indicated evidence of mediation of the relationship between epistemic development and the types of sources and time spent reading information by one of the proposed epistemic motivations, need for cognition. Regression analyses also revealed a lack of relationship between epistemic behaviors in the task and perceived sufficiency of information suggestive of either an interaction between variables or influence by additional latent factors influencing standards for what counts as sufficient information as the basis of a justified opinion. Mixed method analyses indicated few significant differences in the types or amount of evidence that individuals provide as justification related to epistemic development, motivation, or strategies. However, mixed-methods analyses involving comparison of quantitative and qualitative measures revealed individual differences in the amount to which interest in the topic and risk perception influenced both the quantity and quality of the information accessed. This suggests the need to account for the influence of epistemic self-regulation and epistemic metacognition in an overall model of epistemic cognition. | |
