ABSTRACT With the advent of Web 2.0 media, there is a greater prevalence of science misinformation available to the public. This issue is particularly problematic for novices who often believe that science in the media is factual and objective, even though an expected outcome of secondary education is to develop students’ abilities to critically evaluate information. By conducting cognitive Think Alouds and retrospective interviews with high school students, this study examined (1) their stances towards flawed claims in a Web media article about vaccination, (2) types of background knowledge used to make their assessments, and (3) responses when asked directly to critique the claims. Results of qualitative coding indicated that students who were most critical of the claims based their evaluation on knowledge of appropriate scientific reasoning and literacy skills. In contrast, students who accepted the claims relied on novice-level content knowledge, or a flawed understanding of scientific reasoning. Lastly, some students initially accepted the claims became critical in retrospect when explicitly asked to critique the article during the interview phase. Findings from this investigation suggest a need for more opportunities for students to critique science information, and a greater curricular emphasis on teaching evaluation skills and knowledge of valid scientific reasoning.

中文翻译：

---

学生和基于网络的有关疫苗接种错误信息的评估：批判性阅读还是被动接受要求？

摘要随着Web 2.0媒体的出现，向公众提供了更多的科学错误信息。对于初学者来说，这个问题尤其成问题，他们通常认为媒体科学是事实和客观的，即使中学教育的预期结果是发展学生的批判性评估信息的能力。通过对高中生进行认知大声思考和回顾性访谈，本研究检查了（1）他们对网络媒体上有关疫苗接种的说法有误的主张的立场，（2）用于评估的背景知识类型，以及（3）回应当直接问到批评要求时。定性编码的结果表明，对主张最挑剔的学生是根据适当的科学推理和读写能力的知识进行评估的。相反，接受主张的学生则依赖于新手级别的内容知识，或者对科学推理的理解有误。最后，一些学生最初接受了要求，即在面试阶段明确要求对文章进行评论时，这些要求在回顾中变得至关重要。这项调查的结果表明，学生需要更多的机会来批判科学信息，并且在课程上应更加重视教学评估技能和有效的科学推理知识。最后，一些学生最初接受了要求，即在面试阶段明确要求对文章进行评论时，这些要求在回顾中变得至关重要。这项调查的结果表明，学生需要更多的机会来批判科学信息，并且在课程上应更加重视教学评估技能和有效的科学推理知识。最后，一些学生最初接受了要求，即在面试阶段明确要求对文章进行评论时，这些要求在回顾中变得至关重要。这项调查的结果表明，学生需要更多的机会来批判科学信息，并且在课程上应更加重视教学评估技能和有效的科学推理知识。