The present study examines individuals’ thinking during and after reading controversial historical accounts and the possible contribution of epistemic beliefs, emotions, and prior-knowledge in this context. Young adults (n = 39) were asked to read two accounts about a recent war in their country, an own-side account – from a historian of their ethnic group – and an other-side account – from a historian from the adversary ethnic group. Participants were asked to think-aloud and report their emotions during reading. After reading, participants were asked to write a summary. Results showed that participants exhibited my-side bias during reading and writing, while there were also interesting individual differences in epistemic beliefs and prior knowledge. Participants with evaluativist epistemic beliefs were less likely to show my-side bias in the writing task. Epistemic beliefs, along with prior knowledge and the emotion of anger, predicted also low-epistemic processing during reading of other-side text. The paper concludes with a discussion of the educational implications in promoting critical thinking about controversial issues in history.

中文翻译：

---

在阅读有争议的历史记录期间和之后，检查我的偏见

本研究考察了个人在阅读有争议的历史记载期间和之后的思想，以及在这种情况下认知信念，情感和先验知识的可能贡献。年轻人（n = 39）被要求阅读有关他们国家最近战争的两个叙述，一个来自自己种族的历史学家的自己的叙述，另一个来自来自敌对种族群体的历史学家的另一个叙述。要求参与者在阅读过程中大声思考并报告自己的情绪。阅读后，要求参与者写摘要。结果显示，参与者在阅读和写作过程中表现出我方的偏见，而认知信念和先验知识方面也存在有趣的个体差异。具有评估主义认知信念的参与者不太可能在写作任务中表现出我偏见。认知信念，以及先验知识和愤怒情绪，也预示着阅读另一面文本时的低流行性处理。