See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/348382728

Comprehensive Exploration of Digital Literacy: Embedded with Self-

Regulation and Epistemological Beliefs

Article  in  Journal of Science Education and Technology · June 2021

DOI: 10.1007/s10956-020-09887-9

CITATIONS READS

3 224

2 authors:

Mehmet Demirbağ Eralp Bahçivan

Uludag University Bolu Abant Izzet Baysal University
19 PUBLICATIONS   102 CITATIONS    47 PUBLICATIONS   275 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

E-Öğrenme Ortamlarında Kampüs Tabanlı Uzaktan Eğitim Yoluyla Ders Alan Öğrencilerin Sosyal Buradalık ve Öğrenme Odaklı İnanç Sistemleri Arasındaki İlişki View
project

TÜBİTAK (1001) 219K028 - E-Argümantasyon: Fen Eğitimine Yönelik Yenilikçi Bir Yazılımın Geliştirilmesi, Uygulanması ve Değerlendirilmesi View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mehmet Demirbağ on 11 January 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Science Education and Technology
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09887-9

Comprehensive Exploration of Digital Literacy: Embedded

with Self‑Regulation and Epistemological Beliefs
Mehmet Demirbag1   · Eralp Bahcivan2

Accepted: 24 November 2020

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. part of Springer Nature 2021

Abstract
Today, science educators accept that digital literacy has been one of the key concepts for science teachers in terms of creating
meaningful science learning environments. Although there are many research attempts investigating digital literacy in science
teacher education literature, the interrelations of this concept to cognitive and metacognitive aspects are still blurred. In this
regard, this study was conducted to investigate the structural relations among preservice science teachers’ epistemological
beliefs, self-regulated learning skills, and digital literacy as well as the reasons for these relations. A sequential explanatory
research design guided this two-step study. The first step involved structural equation modeling analysis of data from 612
preservice science teachers. The second step focused on the reasons for the structural relations observed in the first step. Six
participants were selected as the cases in the latter. Overall, the results showed that participants’ epistemological beliefs,
self-regulation skills, and digital literacy are closely related to each other. Epistemological and self-regulational filters as well
as epistemic bias and the context in which the filters exist directly affect these relationships. Considering the results, it was
suggested that preservice science teachers should be involved in inquiry-based and argumentation-based learning mediums
since these types of mediums contribute positively to the development of epistemological beliefs and self-regulation skills.

Keywords  Digital literacy · Self-regulation · Epistemological beliefs · Preservice science teachers

Introduction assist their awareness regarding the conscious use of ICTs.

Information and communication technologies (ICTs) ensure
learning environments in which individuals can access infor-
mation sources rapidly through online systems. Today, stu-
dents often utilize internet-based mediums for any type of
research related to daily life and/or science (Mason et al.
2018). The internet provides an unlimited amount of infor-
mation together with verbal and visual representations that
actually support computer-assisted learning processes.
Querying the reliability and justification of these informa-
tion sources in a way that is conscious of their evidentiary
basis is vital for today’s science learners (Mason et al. 2010;
Walraven et al. 2009). Therefore, science learners should be
supported in developing the cognitive processes that will
* Mehmet Demirbag
mtdemirbag@uludag.edu.tr
1
Department of Science Education, Bursa Uludağ University,
Bursa, Turkey
2
Department of Science Education, Abant İzzet Baysal
University, Bolu, Turkey
In this respect, digital literacy (DL), defined differently
among researchers, is accepted as a key concept (Greene
et al. 2014).
Examining definitions of digital literacy, it is clear that
the term has been related to other concepts, such as com-
puter literacy, information literacy, and media literacy (Mar-
tin 2008). Green et al. (2014) criticize these DL definitions
because of the omission of cognitive and meta-cognitive
processes. At this point, Green et al. (2014) tackle DL as
an integrative part of developing meaningful cognitive pro-
cesses and combining the information obtained through
online systems. According to this definition, the DL of sci-
ence learners is closely related to their epistemic cognition
and information-organizing processes, which are related
to their self-regulated learning skills. Certain researchers
have already claimed that online science learning environ-
ments should include processes of justification, querying the
reliability of information sources, selection, organization,
meaning-making, and reflection (Greene et al. 2010; Mason
et al. 2011; Tsai et al. 2011).

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

Current literature has presented scientific evidences that
DL is affected by students’ beliefs about literacy develop-
ment (List 2019). Also, in another research with a sample of
Philippine university students, Atoy et al. (2020) has found
that DL is effective on their online information searching
strategies. In addition, Blau et al. (2020) reported self-regu-
lation skills as an essential part of DL. In this regard, it can
be mentioned that research studies conducted for conceptu-
alization of DL has still been continuous.
Considering the scientific literature, we also believe
that DL intertwines with epistemological beliefs and self-
regulation skills that promote cognitive and meta-cognitive
processes. In this regard, a digitally literate science learner
can be defined as an individual who benefits from multiple
information sources, queries the reliability of information
sources, and organizes these informational bits for their own
learning during the utilization of any type of ICT. Therefore,
DL is an umbrella term relating to epistemological beliefs
and self-regulation; however, the literature still requires
empirical studies supporting these claims. Indeed, many
research studies have already shown that certain concepts
(such as online search strategies, search outcomes, and
source evaluation) related to epistemological beliefs, self-
regulated learning, and DL are closely aligned (Greene et al.
2010, 2014; Mason et al. 2018; Muis 2007; Strømsø and
Bråten 2010; Tsai et al. 2011). There is a lack of empirical
evidence supporting the alignment of these variables with
a sample of preservice science teachers through a mixed
design research method using structural equation mod-
eling, and this study aims to fill that gap. Structural mod-
eling studies focusing on the relationship between preser-
vice science teachers’ DL and self-regulated learning skills
should be conducted to close the gap in scientific literature.
Such studies empower science educators to capture a more
comprehensive picture of umbrella concepts (in this study,
DL) comprising key variables. Preservice science teachers
were selected as the participants of this research because of
their future potential effects on their science learners. Fur-
thermore, studying a sample of preservice science teachers
provides science educators with two types of perspectives.
The first perspective is that preservice teachers are actually
undergraduate students. Therefore, studying such a sam-
ple provides researchers with evidence related to learners.
The second perspective is that preservice teachers will be
teachers in the near future. Therefore, verifications coming
from such a sample allow researchers to deal with issues of
teacher education realistically.
The study is based on a two-step guideline. The first
step will focus on examining the structural relations among
preservice science teachers’ self-regulated learning skills,
DL, and epistemological beliefs. The second step will focus
on the verification of these relationships within a natural
setting. In this step, the participants observed as holding
13
Journal of Science Education and Technology
extreme characteristics will be invited to solve a scientific
conflict; then, stimulated recall interviews will be conducted
to understand the reasons for in/coherences between their
behaviors and the statistical model generated in the first step.
Theoretical Framework
Epistemological Beliefs
In their prominent review, Hofer and Pintrich (1997)
define epistemological beliefs as people’s beliefs related
to knowledge and knowing. Beliefs about the structure of
knowledge comprise certainty and simplicity dimensions,
whereas beliefs about knowing involve justification and
source dimensions. There are three different approaches in
this area: the developmental perspective, the belief system
approach, and the domain/context-based epistemological
perspective. The first began with Perry’s (1970) longitudinal
studies, which were then supported by certain researchers
(e.g.Baxter and Magolda 1992; King and Kitchener 1994).
According to this approach, people’s epistemological stance
has a univariate characteristic involving the beliefs stated
above and develops through alignment among these dimen-
sions. To illustrate, an individual in the dualistic phase
most likely believes that any type of knowledge is right
or wrong and that authorities determine which one is cor-
rect, whereas individuals in the commitment within relativ-
ism phase may believe that each individual is responsible
for their own meaning-making processes, but any type of
knowledge should be justified by evidence. According to this
perspective, developmental shifts are triggered by biological
progress and social interactions, as stated previously by the
Piagetian framework (Perry 1970).
The second approach, the belief system approach, has
been proposed by Schommer (1990), who states that per-
sonal epistemology encompasses people’s epistemological
beliefs, which are more or less independent. That is, people’s
epistemological beliefs can be aligned as a belief system
holding multidimensional (instead of univariate) character-
istics. Individuals’ weak epistemological beliefs are labeled
as naïve, whereas their strong epistemological beliefs are
labeled as sophisticated. Therefore, to illustrate multidimen-
sionality, an individual may hold sophisticated epistemo-
logical beliefs in the simplicity and justification dimensions,
whereas the same individual may hold naïve epistemological
beliefs in the source and certainty dimensions. Such an indi-
vidual believes that any type of knowledge has a complex
structure (sophisticated in simplicity) is verified by different
types of evidence (sophisticated in justification), comes from
authorities (naïve in source), and is unchangeable (naïve in
certainty).
The last approach, called the domain/context-based
epistemological perspective, defends the idea that people’s
Journal of Science Education and Technology
epistemological beliefs are affected by the characteristics
of domains (e.g., natural science vs. social studies) and
contextual situations (Buehl and Alexander 2006; Hammer
and Elby 2002; Palmer and Marra 2008). For example, stu-
dents may believe that knowledge in natural science is more
certain than that in psychology (Palmer and Marra 2008).
Furthermore, a student holding sophisticated epistemologi-
cal beliefs may behave as if she/he has naïve epistemologi-
cal beliefs to score higher on the exam (Elby and Hammer
2001).
The value of epistemological beliefs for science education
comes from their centralized position in accordance with
the many variables related to teaching and learning science
(Hofer and Pintrich 1997). A plethora of researchers have
continuously verified that science learners’ and/or preser-
vice science teachers’ epistemological beliefs are significant
predictors for certain cognitive and affective characteristics,
such as teaching/learning beliefs (Bahcivan 2014), academic
achievement (Stathopoulou and Vosniadou 2007), achieve-
ment goals (Lin and Tsai 2017), self-efficacy in learning sci-
ence (Yilmaz-Tuzun and Topcu 2008), self-regulation (Muis
and Franco 2009), and argumentativeness (Nussbaum and
Bendixen 2003). Additionally, research studies have shown
that preservice science teachers’ epistemological beliefs are
effective on their DL (Greene et al. 2014; Güneş and Bahçi-
van 2018). Considering the scientific evidence, a researcher
may expect that a preservice science teacher holding sophis-
ticated epistemological beliefs may query the certainty and
reliability of information sources when she/he is involved
in online learning environments. Such a preservice science
teacher may attempt to justify knowledge by utilizing mul-
tiple information sources and evidence. In other respects,
preservice science teachers’ epistemological beliefs may
be related to their self-regulation skills, which are critically
important for DL. Self-regulation skills involve organizing,
criticizing, and evaluating information.
Self‑Regulation
Self-regulation is a key concept comprising cognitive and
metacognitive skills that are essential for the effective
learning of science students (Yerdelen and Sungur 2019).
Although there are many definitions of self-regulation,
Pintrich and Groot (1990) underline three basic character-
istics of a self-regulated learner. The first is that self-regu-
lated learners apply metacognitive strategies such as modi-
fying, planning, and tracing to check their own learning
processes. Second, such a learner is conscious enough of
his/her learning efforts to direct and take control of them.
For example, a self-regulated science learner is persistent
when she/he encounters a difficult task. Finally, self-reg-
ulated science learners adopt higher-order metacognitive
strategies such as rehearsal and elaboration during their
learning processes. Furthermore, Muis (2007) defines four
tenets of self-regulated learning processes: (1) task defini-
tion, (2) planning and goal setting, (3) enactment, and (4)
evaluation. In the first step, science learners construct a
task perception based on internal (prior knowledge and
epistemic cognition) and external (contextual) factors. In
the second step, these learners make plans and determine
goals and learning strategies to realize meaningful learn-
ing. Then, they apply predetermined plans and strategies
and construct their own knowledge. At the final step, they
evaluate the achievements and failures of task products for
each of the previous steps. This step actually corresponds
to reflecting on previous decisions and actions.
In addition to the necessity of self-regulation if sci-
ence learners are to achieve meaningful comprehension in
regular classes, this concept has gained prominence in the
digital era. Science learners are expected to apply the four
tenets explained above in ICT-embedded learning medi-
ums (Strømsø and Bråten 2010). To illustrate, self-regu-
lated science learners present better performances in terms
of examining the validity and reliability of information
sources in internet mediums (Mason et al. 2018). Addi-
tionally, considering the empirical and theoretical results,
the scientific literature has shown that science learners’
epistemological beliefs and self-regulation skills are inter-
twined (Barzilai and Zohar 2012; Muis 2008). For exam-
ple, Muis (2007) has theorized that epistemological beliefs
play a vital role in determining the cognitive and affective
conditions of tasks and that such beliefs affect learning
standards. Additionally, she has claimed that self-regula-
tion skills may affect epistemological beliefs because these
skills involve evaluation (reflection) processes. Moreover,
Greene et al. (2010) have conducted theoretical research
focusing on why individuals’ epistemological beliefs are
effective on their cognitive and metacognitive processes
during learning periods in computer-supported learning
mediums; then, they presented micro and macro evalua-
tions related to the interwoven structure of epistemologi-
cal beliefs and self-regulation skills. According to their
evaluations, being exposed to higher-order learning tasks
in computer-supported learning mediums may contribute
positively to science learners’ epistemological develop-
ment. Additionally, they have claimed that interventions
in self-regulation processes may deactivate sophisticated
epistemological beliefs in these learning mediums. Empir-
ical evidence supports these claims. For example, learn-
ers holding sophisticated epistemological beliefs tend to
adopt more deep-processing learning strategies, such as
processing more nodes (e.g., Pieschl et al. 2008). Consid-
ering these empirical and theoretical findings, we believe
that this interwoven structure of epistemological beliefs
and self-regulation skills should play a significant role in
preservice science teachers’ DL.
13

Digital Literacy
DL is one of the most important key concepts for this era
because it has become a survival skill (Eshet-Alkalai 2012).
DL means having not only basic skills related to the uti-
lization of digital devices but also complex skills such as
cognitive, motor, social, and emotional skills that assist
learners by empowering their learning outcomes in digital
environments (Eshet-Alkalai 2012). DL has been paired with
similar concepts, such as media and visual literacy, ICT lit-
eracy, and information literacy (Martin 2008). In addition
to developing essential knowledge, skills, and attitudes in
internet/computer supported learning mediums, DL stud-
ies have also focused on science learners’ critical evalua-
tions regarding their learning processes. Learners have to
access multiple knowledge sources, evaluate evidence, and
query the validation and reliability of information sources
while they attempt to construct knowledge in ICT-supported
mediums (Strømsø and Bråten 2010; Ferguson et al. 2012;
Walraven et al. 2009). This point actually corresponds to the
differentiation between DL and ICT skills, because DL does
not only comprise of gaining knowledge and skills but also
comprises of reflections about learning processes.
Digitally literate science learners in computer-supported
learning mediums should follow valid and reliable paths to
reach true knowledge in their daily lives and educational
mediums  (Güneş and Bahçivan 2018). For this reason, sci-
ence learners should be able to conduct research on multi-
ple documents, focus on procedural knowledge instead of
descriptive knowledge, construct their own arguments, and
possess higher order learning strategies (which are support-
ing, organizing and evaluating) to support these arguments
(Strømsø and Bråten 2010; Ferguson et al. 2012; Walraven
et  al. 2009). These higher-order learning strategies are
closely related to epistemological beliefs and self-regula-
tion skills (Barzilai and Zohar 2012; Greene et al. 2010;
Muis et al. 2015). Hence, there are also specific definitions
supporting this idea in the scientific literature. For exam-
ple, Greene et al. (2014) define DL as a special blend of
epistemological beliefs and self-regulation skills. Therefore,
revealing close relationships among DL, self-regulation
skills, and epistemological beliefs will be helpful in terms of
Fig. 1   The proposed model
13
Journal of Science Education and Technology
understanding the theoretical baseline of and teaching–learn-
ing DL. In addition, there are indirect findings clarifying the
close relationships among DL, evaluating organizing and
monitoring web pages (Barzilai and Zohar 2012; Greene
et al. 2014; Mason et al. 2018; Strømsø and Bråten 2010).
Additionally, even though recent research does not involve
structural equation modeling, recent findings do present
theoretical and empirical evidence regarding close relation-
ships among DL, self-regulation skills, and epistemological
beliefs (Greene et al. 2010; Greene et al. 2014).
The Proposed Model
The research abstracted above presents empirical and
theoretical evidence regarding the relationship between
preservice science teachers’ epistemological beliefs and
self-regulation skills (Greene and Azevedo 2009; Muis
and Franco 2009; Pieschl et al. 2008; Strømsø and Bråten
2010). Furthermore, previous findings have shown that
individuals’ epistemological beliefs and self-regulation
skills are intertwined with DL-related structures such as
computer-supported learning environments and sources of
evaluation (Barzilai and Zohar 2012; Mason et al. 2018;
Tsai et al. 2011). Considering these findings, the structural
model in Fig. 1 was constructed as the proposed model of
the research.
Considering the recent research discussed above (e.g.,
Barzilai and Zohar 2012; Pieschl et  al. 2008), we first
hypothesize that preservice science teachers holding
sophisticated epistemological beliefs will utilize higher-
order learning strategies such as evaluation of knowledge in
digital mediums, accessing sources of evidence, identifying
bases for evaluation, and adopting multiple documents. In
other words, the first hypothesis ­(H1) of the proposed model
is that preservice science teachers’ epistemological beliefs
affect their self-regulation skills. Second, current findings
stress that sophisticated epistemological beliefs may trig-
ger utilization of higher order strategies such as evalua-
tion, organization, and monitoring during online search and
knowledge construction (e.g. Pieschl et al. 2008; Tsai et al.
2011). Therefore, we hypothesize that preservice science
teachers’ epistemological beliefs contribute to their DL
Journal of Science Education and Technology
positively ­(H2). Finally, a limited number of research stud-
ies (e.g., Mason et al. 2018) show that science learners’ self-
regulation skills make them query the validity and reliability
of information sources in digital platforms. Therefore, we
hypothesize that preservice science teachers’ self-regulation
skills are positively related to their DL ­(H3).
The first part of this research study will examine the
statistical results related to the proposed model in Fig. 1.
However, we may obtain unexpected results due to the cul-
tural differentiations between western and eastern samples.
Additionally, even if we do not have contrasting results, we
must determine the reasons for the proposed relations in
the model. Considering these issues, the second part of the
study will be conducted to verify the observed relations in
natural settings. In this part of the study, conflict texts will
be presented to the selected participants to make visible the
hypothesized relations among their self-regulation skills,
epistemological beliefs and DL. We take this approach
because in many studies (e.g. Muis et al. 2015.), conflict
texts have been used as effective tools to reveal the episte-
mological beliefs and self-regulation skills of individuals.
Significance of the Study
This study has several significant aspects. Pairs of the three
variables of this study have been studied previously; how-
ever, this study is, as far as we know, the first attempt to
simultaneously examine the possible relations among all of
these variables mentioned above. Second, these relation-
ships will be investigated with advanced statistical methods,
which will be followed by qualitative queries; therefore, the
study will contribute positively to the comprehension of DL.
Hence, within this study DL will be related to cognitive vari-
ables called as self-regulation and epistemological beliefs.
In this regard, results of this study will clarify whether these
variables are integrated parts of DL. Because, this study will
not only present a theoretical/proposed model for follow-
ing research, but also examine whether there are significant
relations. Third, the research data in this area mostly come
from Western countries. Thus, samples from Turkey, as a
transitional country between western and eastern cultures,
may shed light on DL comprehension more extensively.
Finally, Turkey has provided ample budgets in the educa-
tional arena to foster the DL development of science learn-
ers. All state schools have been equipped with touchable
boards connected to the internet for approximately ten years.
Therefore, the results of this research are also vital in terms
of educational policy implications.
Research Questions
This study examined the relationships among preservice sci-
ence teachers’ epistemological beliefs, self-regulation skills
and DL as well as the reasons for these relations. Therefore,
we have two research questions:
(1) What are the relationships among preservice science
teachers’ epistemological beliefs, self-regulation skills
and DL?
(2) How are preservice science teachers’ epistemological
beliefs, self-regulation skills, and DL related when they
are confronted with an online conflict text?
Method
The first research question of the study is constructed to
determine the relationships among preservice science teach-
ers’ epistemological beliefs, self-regulation skills and DL.
To respond to the question, associational research (Fraen-
kel and Wallen 2009) will be conducted. Additionally, the
second question queries the reasons for these relationships,
and the second part of the research will be a case study.
Therefore, a quantitative research design will be followed by
a qualitative one. Creswell (2008) labels such mixed design
studies as explanatory sequential research designs.
Study I
Participants
Convenience sampling was adopted to maximize the number
of participants (Creswell 2008). A total of 612 Turkish pre-
service science teachers (503 female, 106 male, 3 unmarked)
from 6 different state universities participated in the study.
All the participants are undergraduate students of science
education departments of education faculties. They will be
working as elementary (middle) school science teachers
after graduation. Their ages ranged from 19 to 25 (M = 20.81
and Sd = 1.21). A total of 122 were 2nd year undergraduate
students, 300 were 3rd year undergraduate students, and 188
were final-year undergraduate students (2 students left the
year box unmarked).
The Instrument
The instrument contained 4 parts. The first was arranged to
collect certain demographic information. Each part involved
one of the scales explained below.
Scientific Epistemological Belief Scale
The scale was developed by Conley et al. (2004) to measure
elementary students’ epistemological beliefs. There are 26
5-point Likert items (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly
agree) distributed among 4 dimensions: certainty (6 items;
13

e.g., scientific knowledge is always true), source (5 items;
e.g., everybody has to believe what scientists say), develop-
ment (6 items; e.g., ideas in science sometimes change), and
justification (9 items; e.g., ideas about science experiments
come from being curious and thinking about how things
work). After implementation, item scores in the source and
certainty dimensions were recoded so that higher scores cor-
responded to sophisticated epistemological beliefs. The scale
was adapted into Turkish by Bahcivan (2014) with a sample
of Turkish preservice science teachers. He reported accept-
able fit indices (χ2/df = 1.44, CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.93, and
RMSEA = 0.04) and alpha reliability scores for each dimen-
sion in the range of 0.66–0.82. A confirmatory factor analy-
sis (n = 612) was also conducted for construct-related evi-
dence for validation because it had been previously adapted
with a similar sample (Tabachnick and Fidell 2013). One
item from the certainty dimension was extracted because
of a factor loading score lower than 0.40 (Shevlin and
Miles 1998). The analyses resulted in acceptable fit indices
(χ2/df = 1.89, CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.94, and RMSEA = 0.03) as
well as factor-loading values between 0.44 and 0.74. Alpha
reliability scores were observed as 0.78, 0.75, 0.69, and
0.84 for the source, certainty, development, and justifica-
tion dimensions, respectively.
Digital Literacy Scale
This scale was originally developed by Ng (2012) to meas-
ure undergraduate students’ DL. It involves 17 5-point Lik-
ert items distributed among 4 dimensions: attitudes towards
ICT for learning (7 items), technical (6 items), cognitive (2
items), and social-emotional (2 items). Güneş and Bahçi-
van (2018) previously adapted the scale into Turkish with a
sample of preservice science teachers by utilizing explora-
tory factor analysis. The analysis resulted in a one-factor
solution explaining 40% of the variance. The resulting factor
comprised all the items of technical, cognitive, and social-
emotional dimensions with an alpha reliability score of 0.86.
This one-factor scale involving 10 items was implemented
in the study. A confirmatory factor analysis (n = 612) was
conducted since the participants had the same characteris-
tics for whom the scale was adopted (Tabachnick and Fidell
2013). Two items were eliminated because of factor loading
values lower than 0.4 (Shevlin and Miles 1998). The results
presented acceptable fit indices (χ2/df = 2.42, CFI = 0.97,
TLI = 0.96, and RMSEA = 0.04) as well as factor loading
values between 0.44 and 0.72. The alpha reliability score
was 0.81.
Self‑Regulation Scale
Motivated strategies for learning questionnaire were uti-
lized for the development of the self-regulation items. The
13
Journal of Science Education and Technology
questionnaire originally developed by Pintrich et al. (1993)
involved 81 7-point Likert items. Utilizing only the meta-
cognitive self-regulated subdimension of this questionnaire
was preferable because one of the related variables was self-
regulation. The metacognitive self-regulation dimension
comprised 12 items that were used in this study to meas-
ure preservice science teachers’ self-regulation skills. This
dimension was previously utilized (Akyol et al. 2010), and
the researchers reported acceptable fit indices (CFI = 0.90,
GFI = 0.92, RMSEA = 0.06). Before the analyses, 2 items
were recoded to provide coherence among items. Then, a
confirmatory factor analysis (n = 612) was conducted for
validation. Accordingly, 2 items were eliminated because
of factor loading values lower than 0.4 (Shevlin and
Miles 1998). The analysis yielded acceptable fit indices (χ2/
df = 2.18, CFI = 0.98, TLI = 0.97, and RMSEA = 0.04), fac-
tor loading scores between 0.43 and 0.73 and an alpha reli-
ability score of 0.85.
The Procedure
The authors first informed the participants about the pur-
poses of the study, and then the instruments were distrib-
uted during regular class times. A total of 651 forms were
returned; however, 39 of them were not included in the
dataset because of highly missing data. Responding the
instrument took approximately 25 min. Participants were
also assured of the confidentality of their personal data and
were asked to write their names (or to use and write nick-
names) for Study II. All the data were entered into SPSS 21,
which was then utilized for reliability analyses. AMOS 24
was utilized for confirmatory factor analyses and structural
equation modeling.
Results and Discussions for Study I
The first research question was answered with a structural
equation modeling analysis (n = 612) on the proposed
model, as shown in Fig. 1. The analysis yielded accept-
able fit indices (χ2/df = 1.95, CFI = 0.91, TLI = 0.90, and
RMSEA = 0.04). Significant regression weights in the sta-
tistical model are represented in Fig. 2.
According to Fig. 2, participants’ epistemological beliefs
in the certainty and justification dimensions were positively
related to their self-regulation skills. That is, participants’
sophisticated epistemological beliefs in these epistemic
dimensions positively triggered their self-regulation skills.
Additionally, it seemed that epistemological beliefs in cer-
tainty and development dimensions positively predicted
their DL. In other words, when a preservice science teacher
believed that knowledge was changeable and developed over
time, she/he presented digitally literate skills. These find-
ings are coherent with the scientific literature stating that
Journal of Science Education and Technology
Fig. 2  Statistical model
(*p < 0.05, **p < 0.001)
epistemological beliefs have a centralized position in teach-
ing–learning belief systems (Hofer and Pintrich 1997). Fur-
thermore, analysis showed that participants’ self-regulation
skills positively predicted their DL. That is, qualifications
in self-regulation skills are positively effective on preser-
vice science teachers’ DL. This result is also consistent with
previous research studies (Greene et al. 2014; Mason et al.
2018). Moreover, some epistemological beliefs were not sig-
nificantly related to self-regulation skills and DL. The rea-
sons for these observations will be investigated in Study II.
Study II
This step of the study was conducted to investigate how
preservice science teachers’ epistemological beliefs, self-
regulation skills, and DL were related when they were
encountered with an online conflict text. Considering the
literature evidencing that DL is a specific blend of self-regu-
lation skills and epistemological beliefs (Greene et al. 2014),
participants with the highest and lowest scores on the scales
measuring degrees on these two variables were involved in
this step. Since there was more than one case in Study II, a
multiple case study design guided the research for this step
(Creswell 2007).
Participants
Study I partly evidenced that preservice science teachers’
epistemological beliefs and self-regulation skills affected
their DL; therefore, participants for extreme cases were
selected by purposive sampling considering their episte-
mological status and self-regulation-skills scores (Creswell
2008). First, participants’ total scores were calculated, and
then, 3 participants for each of the higher-order and lower-
order cases were selected. A higher-order preservice science
teacher has the highest scores in both epistemological beliefs
and self-regulation-skills scales, whereas the reverse is valid
for lower-order cases.
Data Collection
Semi‑structured Interviews
Participants were queried before the observation process
with semi-structured interviews. In this part, they were pre-
sented with their own responses to the scales. Then, they
were asked to explain their reasons for item responses.
The aim of these interviews was to confirm their status in
the three variables of Study I. Each interview, which took
approximately 40 min, was audio recorded and transcribed
verbatim before the analyses.
Observation
Each participant was individually invited to read the con-
flict text on a digital medium connected to the internet. The
authors prepared conflicting texts about the utilization of
agricultural pesticides. The text was poorly structured since
the scientists defend different sides based on scientific data.
One side was rejecting the usage of agricultural pesticides,
whereas the other side claimed that the utilization of pesti-
cides was definitely necessary. Participants were allowed
to read and search on this issue individually on the internet
without any time limitations. The individual searches took
approximately 1 h for each participant. All their actions in
digital media were recorded, and their screencasts were also
captured through the OBS Studio program.
Stimulated Recall
Following the observation processes, participants were
invited to conduct semi-structured interviews for stimulated
recall. Each participant watched their own screencasts and
was asked about the reasons for their actions. The semi-
structured interview protocol involved several questions,
such as “Why did you choose to conduct research on this
website?” and “How did the ideas of authorities affect your
sources of information? Why?” Stimulated recall interviews
took approximately 1 h for each participant. Interviews were
13
 Journal of Science Education and Technology

audio recorded and then transcribed verbatim before the

analyses.

Data Analysis

Content analysis was implemented on the transcribed data-

set, as the purpose of the analysis was to explain language in
detail (Krippendorff 2004). Content analysis produced cod-
ing units such as epistemological beliefs and self-regulation
skills, and coding categories such as sophisticated-naïve and
regulated highly-regulated lowly. The first author coded all
the datasets, and then, the second author distributed pre-
determined coding categories to the selected discourses to
examine intercoder reliability. Then, Krippendorff’s α was
estimated as 0.86, which indicates high reliability of cod-
ing. Data triangulation was ensured by utilization of inter-
view data, observation data, and stimulated recalls as well
as participants’ instrument scores for validation purposes.
Furthermore, because stimulated recall interviews were
conducted after the observation processes, these interviews
served as the source of member checking, which contributes
positively to validation processes (Creswell 2007). Moreo-
ver, data collection periods ensured trustworthiness because
of the follow-up nature between observation and interview
sessions (Lincoln and Guba 1985).

Results and Discussions for Study II

This step of the study was conducted to deeply investi-

gate the reasons for the effectiveness of preservice science
teachers’ self-regulation skills and epistemological beliefs
on their DL as represented in the second research question.
Participants were asked to utilize digital media and to con-
struct their own arguments after reading the arguments pre-
sented in the conflict text. In this way, we aimed to unveil
participants’ research and learning strategies together with
reasons. Table 1 presents coding units and examples of cod-
ing categories detected in the semi-structured interviews,
observations, and stimulated recall interview transcripts.
The logical paths among these coding units and categories
are also represented in Fig. 3.
Table 1 shows that preservice science teachers’ epistemo-
logical beliefs filter their online research strategies, which
were coded as reliability and credibility of digital sources,
looking for evidence, multimodal representation, justifica-
tion of personal experience, and justification of multiple
documents. This result is consistent with the literature stress-
ing the centralized position of epistemological beliefs in
teaching–learning belief systems (Hofer and Pintrich 1997).
Analyses showed that preservice science teachers holding
sophisticated epistemological beliefs and presenting high
self-regulation skills tended to utilize research strategies
coded as looking for evidence, multimodal representation,
Fig. 3  The comprehensive model
justification of personal experience, and justification of
multiple documents. Interestingly, all the cases that hold
sophisticated or naïve epistemological beliefs seemed to
activate the epistemological filter coded as reliability and
credibility of digital sources. However, the degree of utiliz-
ing the ‘reliability and credibility of digital sources’ filter
seemed to be affected by their self-regulation skills. All the
participants made use of certain popular research applica-
tions, such as Google Scholar and Wikipedia; however,
highly self-regulated participants were skeptical about the
reliability of information provided by these digital sources.
For example, one of the lower-order participants stated that
“I preferred to enter Google Scholar, because the knowl-
edge provided by this source is constructed by evidenced
information.” On the other hand, one of the higher order
participants expressed that “I reached the information pack-
age provided by National Ministry of Agriculture by using
Google Scholar; however, I could not claim that all infor-
mation provided by this source was definitely right. …but
I believe that this is more reliable…” This result actually

13
Journal of Science Education and Technology

Table 1  Coding list
Coding unit Coding categories Example of quotation Data ­source*

Epistemological beliefs Sophisticated Any type of knowledge can be falsified in time…I can SS
behave like a scientist in my daily life to reach truth…
Naïve Scientists are unique regarding reaching the truth…my SS
inferences are always weak in comparison to scientists
even if I reach the same truth as them…
Epistemological filter Reliability and credibility of digital sources I entered directly into Google Scholar because of its reli- O, SR
ability
Looking for evidence I tried to search on the internet related to both of the argu- O, SR
ments in the text
Multimodal representation I utilized tables and graphics to support my claim O, SR
Justification of personal experience I tried to write my own argument considering my previous O, SR
knowledge from chemistry courses
Justification of multiple documents I utilized not only scientific articles but also used news O, SR
portals
Self-regulation skills Regulated highly I first plan where I can find more valid information during SS
my research
Regulated lowly I did not often prefer to construct my own queries during SS
my studies
Self-regulational filter Detecting counter arguments The text involved not only advantages but also disadvan- SR
tages of utilizing agricultural pesticides
Questioning I ask myself why people still use the pesticides; although, O, SR
they know they are dangerous
Constructing own argument I don’t directly use others’ ideas, but try to first compare, O, SR
and then adapt them to my own ideas
Underlying text I underlined the important points and complex terms in the O, SR
text…
Abstracting I wrote a few sentences to abstract all the information I O, SR
searched
Revising I revised the text to provide wholeness among knowledge O, SR
parts
Epistemic bias Prejudice My previous knowledge, most likely, let me focus on just SR
disadvantages
Digital literacy Qualified I utilize digital mediums for any type of research to find SS
multiple information sources…
Unqualified I have limited knowledge related to utilization of vari- SS
ous types of digital technologies… My ICT skills are
restricted…

* SS for semi-structured interview, O for observation, SR for stimulated recall

shows that by positively triggering self-regulation skills,
epistemological beliefs have not only directed effects but
also indirect effects on participants’ DL.
Moreover, analyses indicated that higher-order partici-
pants used more effective self-regulational filtering strat-
egies coded as detecting counter arguments, questioning,
constructing their own argument, underlying text, abstract-
ing, and revising. In other words, it can be mentioned that
preservice teachers presenting higher order self-regulation
skills adopted the filtering strategies more effectively in
comparison to lower order participants. Duncan and McK-
eachie (2005) state that questioning and constructing one’s
own argument, utilized during decision making or learning
processes, are closely related to metacognition and critical
thinking. Therefore, it is clear that preservice science teach-
ers’ self-regulation skills directly affect their DL since a
digitally literate individual requires certain strategies, such
as questioning in online systems and critical thinking.
Epistemic bias was an unexpected coding unit at the
beginning of this research. The results showed that partici-
pants’ learning and/or searching processes were affected
by epistemic biases. This result was especially clear
among the higher-order participants. These participants
seemed that they had already made their decisions related
to their own arguments just after reading the conflict text
but before the searching processes. Such a prejudgment
seemed to prevent them from utilizing higher order learn-
ing strategies. For example, a higher-order participant

13

ignored the scientific information related to the advan-
tages of agricultural pesticides, although she had an article
on this issue. When this situation was recalled during the
stimulated recall interview, she stated that “My previous
knowledge, most likely, let me focus on just disadvan-
tages.” It is obvious that these prejudgments blocked par-
ticipants from activating their epistemic metacognition or
epistemic thinking processes. Coherent results were also
observed among lower-order participants. For example,
one of the lower-order participants stated that “I don’t
require justification of the knowledge provided by the text
because I have already known the effect of chemical mate-
rials on human health as a preservice science teacher.”
Similar findings were presented by previous researchers
who mostly called these prejudgments heuristics (Finu-
cane et al. 2000; Kahneman 2011). Therefore, individu-
als seemed to examine their decision-making or learning
processes by considering their prejudgments even if they
held sophisticated epistemological beliefs.
To sum up it seemed that participants’ previous beliefs
and experiences in both groups made them to hold into epis-
temic bias. This epistemic bias, then, caused them to take
their decisions automatically and prevented them to benefit
from justification processes. This result is consistent with
Kahneman’s (2011) thinking fast and slow processes.
Conclusions, Limitations and Implications
There were two research questions of this study. The first
was related to investigating relationships among preser-
vice science teachers’ self-regulation skills, epistemologi-
cal beliefs, and DL. The results and discussions presented
above showed that these variables were interrelated. The
second research question was constructed to explicate the
reasons of these relationships. Analyses and discussions pre-
sented above showed that epistemological beliefs and self-
regulation skills filter preservice science teachers’ learning
strategies. Also, their decision-making processes related
to conflict texts were affected by epistemic bias. As briefly
presented in theoretical framework of the paper, previous
research findings have already shown micro relationships
among preservice science teachers’ epistemological beliefs,
self-regulation skills, and DL. However, this study modeled
the relationships among these variables empirically and sup-
ported its findings with qualitative research. In this regard,
findings of this study contribute into scientific literature by
clarification of DL with intimate relationships with these
variables. Briefly stated, this study examined relationships
of DL with self-regulation skills and epistemological beliefs
comprehensively by quantitative and qualitative evidences.
The research has three main limitations. The first is that
DL is a concept that is related to all citizens in a society;
13
Journal of Science Education and Technology
however, research questions of this study have solely
focused on preservice science teachers. In this regard,
results of this study cannot be generalized to all parts of a
society in this form. The second, DL, as mentioned above,
has technical and socio-emotional dimensions in addition
to cognitive aspects. However, within this study its cogni-
tive aspects have been studied in detail. Therefore, results
of this research have been limited in terms of technical and
socio-emotional aspects of the concept. Finally, the data of
this research completely comes from Turkish participants.
This situation seems as obstacle in terms of generalizing
the results to other societies.
When it comes to the implications, the results of the
study presented evidence that preservice science teach-
ers’ DL is affected by their epistemological beliefs and
self-regulation skills. Therefore, DL-related theoretical
frameworks should directly consider these additional vari-
ables. Digitally literate individuals are not only expected
to hold technology-based information and skills but also
should utilize digital technologies effectively in their
learning processes when encountering socio-scientific
issues important to the era. Current literature has already
given clues about interrelationships between DL and cer-
tain other variables related to cognition. These clues were
taken into consideration and evidenced with a scientific
perspective in the current study. In this regard, results have
shown that development of preservice science teachers’
DL can be ensured considering their self-regulation skills
and epistemological beliefs. That is, science teacher edu-
cators should consider that DL development of preservice
science teachers cannot be realized independent from their
epistemological beliefs and self-regulation skills. There-
fore, learning context of preservice teachers should be
updated in this direction. Therefore, it can be suggested
that individuals should be involved in inquiry-based and
argumentation-based learning mediums since these types
of mediums contribute positively to the development
of epistemological beliefs and self-regulation skills. In
inquiry-based and argumentation-based mediums, learn-
ers construct their own claims, search on the knowledge
sources, and regulate their learning processes. Also, they
get a chance to develop their justification processes so
their epistemological beliefs. These positive sides of such
learning mediums can make also positive contributions
to their DL. Additionally, individuals might be directed
to reflect on their computer-supported learning processes
because these reflections may provide them with strate-
gies, such as monitoring and evaluating, which trigger the
development of self-regulation skills. Finally, epistemic
bias should be studied in detail by following researchers.
Such studies may contribute positively to future research
conducted to protect people from the negative effects of
epistemic bias.
Journal of Science Education and Technology
Compliance with Ethical Standards  ebsco ​ h ost.com/c/artic ​ l es/91273 ​ 7 10/think ​ i ng-digit ​ a l-era-
Conflict of Interests  The authors declare that they have no competing
interests.
Ethical Statement  All procedures performed in studies involving
human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of
the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964
Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical
standards.
Consent Statement  Informed consent was obtained from all individual
participants included in the study.
References
Akyol, G., Sungur, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2010). The contribution of cog-
nitive and metacognitive strategy use to students’ science achieve-
ment. Educational Research and Evaluation, 16(1), 1–21.
Atoy Jr, M. B., Garcia, F. R. O., Cadungog, R. R., Cua, J. D. O., Mangunay,
S. C., & de Guzman, A. B. (2020). Linking digital literacy and
online information searching strategies of Philippine university
students: The moderating role of mindfulness. Journal of Librari-
anship and Information Science, 52(4) 1015-1027.
Güneş, E., & Bahçivan, E. (2018). A mixed research-based model for
pre-service science teachers’ digital literacy: Responses to “which
beliefs” and “how and why they interact” questions. Computers &
Education, 118, 96-106.
Bahcivan, E. (2014). Examining relationships among Turkish pre-
service science teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning,
scientific epistemological beliefs and science teaching efficacy
beliefs. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(6), 870-882.
Barzilai, S., & Zohar, A. (2012). Epistemic thinking in action: Evalu-
ating and integrating online sources. Cognition and Instruc-
tion, 30(1), 39–85.
Baxter Magolda, M. (1992). Knowing and reasoning in college: Gen-
der-related patterns in students’ intellectual development. San
Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Blau, I., Shamir-Inbal, T., & Avdiel, O. (2020). How does the pedagogi-
cal design of a technology-enhanced collaborative academic course
promote digital literacies, self-regulation, and perceived learn-
ing of students? The Internet and Higher Education, 45, https​://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ihedu​c.2019.10072​2
Buehl, M. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2006). Examining the dual nature
of epistemological beliefs. International Journal of Educational
Research, 45(1–2), 28–42.
Conley, A. M., Pintrich, P. R., Vekiri, I., & Harrison, D. (2004).
Changes in epistemological beliefs in elementary science students.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(2), 186–204.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design:
Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting
and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. New Jersey:
Pearson.
Duncan, T. G., & McKeachie, W. J. (2005). The making of the moti-
vated strategies for learning questionnaire. Educational Psycholo-
gist, 40(2), 117–128.
Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2001). On the substance of a sophisticated
epistemology. Science Education, 85(5), 554–567.
Eshet Alkalai, Y. (2012). Thinking in the digital era: A revised model
for digital literacy. Issues in Informing Science & Information
Technology, 9, 267–276. Retrieved from http://conne​c tion​.
revis​ed-model​-digit​al-liter​acy
Ferguson, L. E., Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2012). Epistemic cog-
nition when students read multiple documents containing con-
flicting scientific evidence: A think-aloud study. Learning and
Instruction, 22, 103–120.
Finucane, M. L., Alhakami, A., Slovic, P., & Johnson, S. M. (2000).
The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. Journal
of Behavioral Decision Making, 13(1), 1–17.
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2009). How to design and evaluate
research in education. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Greene, J. A., & Azevedo, R. (2009). A macro-level analysis of SRL
processes and their relations to the acquisition of a sophisticated
mental model of a complex system. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 34(1), 18–29.
Greene, J. A., Muis, K. R., & Pieschl, S. (2010). The role of epis-
temic beliefs in students’ self-regulated learning with computer-
based learning environments: Conceptual and methodological
issues. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 245–257.
Greene, J. A., Yu, S., & Copeland, D. Z. (2014). Measuring criti-
cal components of digital literacy and their relationships with
learning. Computers & Education, 76, 55–69.
Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2002). On the form of personal epistemol-
ogy. In B. K. Hofer, & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.). Personal epistemol-
ogy: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing
(pp. 169–190). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epis-
temological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing
and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research,
67(1), 88–140.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan.
King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judg-
ment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and
critical thinking in adolescents and adults. Jossey-Bass Higher
and Adult Education Series and Jossey-Bass Social and Behav-
ioral Science Series. Jossey-Bass, 350 Sansome Street, San
Francisco, CA 94104–1310.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its
methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lin, T. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2017). Developing instruments concerning
scientific epistemic beliefs and goal orientations in learning
science: A validation study. International Journal of Science
Education, 39(17), 2382–2401.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry London.
England: Sage Publications.
List, A. (2019). Defining digital literacy development: An examina-
tion of pre-service teachers’ beliefs. Computers & Education,
138, 146–158.
Martin, A. (2008). Digital Literacy and the “Digital Society”. In C.
Lankshear, & M. Knobel (Eds.). Digital Literacies: Concepts,
Policies, and Practices (pp. 151-176). New York: Peter Lang.
Mason, L., Boldrin, A., & Ariasi, N. (2010). Epistemic metacog-
nition in context: Evaluating and learning online informa-
tion. Metacognition and Learning, 5(1), 67–90.
Mason, L., Ariasi, N., & Boldrin, A. (2011). Epistemic beliefs in
action: Spontaneous reflections about knowledge and knowing
during online information searching and their influences on
learning. Learning and Instruction, 21, 137–151.
Mason, L., Scrimin, S., Tornatora, M. C., Suitner, C., & Moè, A.
(2018). Internet source evaluation: The role of implicit asso-
ciations and psychophysiological self-regulation. Computers &
Education, 119, 59–75.
13

Muis, K. R. (2007). The role of epistemic beliefs in self-regulated
learning. Educational Psychologist, 42, 173–190.
Muis, K. R. (2008). Epistemic profiles and self-regulated learning:
Examining relations in the context of mathematics problem solv-
ing. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(2), 177–208.
Muis, K. R., & Franco, G. M. (2009). Epistemic beliefs: Setting the
standards for self-regulated learning. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 34(4), 306–318.
Muis, K. R., Pekrun, R., Sinatra, G. M., Azevedo, R., Trevors, G.,
Meier, E., & Heddy, B. C. (2015). The curious case of climate
change: Testing a theoretical model of epistemic beliefs, epistemic
emotions, and complex learning. Learning and Instruction, 39,
168–183.
Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Computers
& Education, 59(3), 1065–1078.
Nussbaum, E. M., & Bendixen, L. D. (2003). Approaching and avoid-
ing arguments: The role of epistemological beliefs, need for cogni-
tion, and extraverted personality traits. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 28(4), 573–595.
Palmer, B., & Marra, R. M. (2008). Individual Domain-Specific Epis-
temologies: Implications for Educational Practice. In M. S. Khine
(Ed.). Knowing, Knowledge and Beliefs: Epistemological Studies
across Diverse Cultures (pp. 325-350). Dordrecht: Springer. https​://
doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6596-5_16
Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development
in the college years: A scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston.
Pieschl, S., Stahl, E., & Bromme, R. (2008). Epistemological beliefs
and self-regulated learning with hypertext. Metacognition and
Learning, 3(1), 17–37.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-
regulated learning components of classroom academic perfor-
mance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., García, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993).
Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for
Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 53, 801–813.
Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge
on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3),
498.
13
View publication stats
Journal of Science Education and Technology
Shevlin, M., & Miles, J. N. (1998). Effects of sample size, model speci-
fication and factor loadings on the GFI in confirmatory factor
analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(1), 85–90.
Stathopoulou, C., & Vosniadou, S. (2007). Conceptual change in phys-
ics and physics-related epistemological beliefs: A relationship
under scrutiny. In S. Vosniadou, A. Baltas, & X. Vamvakoussi
(Eds.), Reframing the conceptual change approach in learning
and instruction (pp. 145–163). New York: Elsevier.
S
​ trømsø, H. I., & Bråten, I. (2010). The role of personal epistemology
in the self-regulation of internet-based learning. Metacognition
and Learning, 5(1), 91–111.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics,
Ed. 6th Pearson Education. Inc, Boston.
Tsai, P. S., Tsai, C. C., & Hwang, G. J. (2011). The correlates of Tai-
wan teachers’ epistemological beliefs concerning internet environ-
ments, online search strategies, and search outcomes. The Internet
and Higher Education, 14(1), 54–63.
Walraven, A., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Boshuizen, H. P. (2009). How
students evaluate information and sources when searching the
World Wide Web for information. Computers & Education, 52(1),
234–246.
Yerdelen, S., & Sungur, S. (2019). Multilevel investigation of students’
self-regulation processes in learning science: Classroom learning
environment and teacher effectiveness. International Journal of
Science and Mathematics Education, 17(1), 89–110.
Yilmaz-Tuzun, O., & Topcu, M. S. (2008). Relationships among pre-
service science teachers’ epistemological beliefs, epistemological
world views, and self-efficacy beliefs. International Journal of
Science Education, 30(1), 65–85.
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.