26
(TBLearnPost); however, deep comprehension strategies (nTotElab, nElab0, nElab1) did
not correlate with the SM questions (SMLearnPost) or with global learning (LearnPost).
Significant
and

positive

correlations

between

nTotElab

and

learning

measures

were
manifested in SE condition. This could be explained by the significant presence of more
processing errors (nElab0) in AOQ students than in SE students.
The
hypothesis

that

AOQ

students

would

obtain

significantly

greater

learning
(LearnPost) was also not confirmed. The greater presence of deep processing strategies
(nTotElab)
in

AOQ

did

not

contribute

as

expected

by

the

presence

of

these

errors
(nElab0). Although the two techniques were not significantly different in learning, AOQ
students performed slightly better with less time reading the text (tRead) and responding
(tResp) in the experimental phase. This indicates that question-guided processing (AOQ)
is more efficient than the processing guided by the explanations a student makes with his
own words and for himself (SE).
Although this study demonstrated that both learning techniques (AOQ, SE) induce
different
processes

of

text

comprehension,

it

could

not

be

demonstrated

that

the
processing of one of the techniques contributes to better learning. Another limitation is
that the results and conclusions of this study cannot be generalized because of the small
sample
size

and

the

soil

effect

of

the

learning

test.

The

students

of

both

techniques
obtained a low performance. Possibly this is due to the difficulty of the content of the text
or
because

of

the

difficulty

of

applying

the

knowledge

learned

to

the

hypothetical
situations (SM questions) of the learning test. Another reason for poor performance may
be
related

to

the

nature

of

the

task.

On

the

one

hand,

AOQ

students

make

more
elaborations from their prior knowledge and this may present errors that are distorting the
formation of a congruent mental representation of the text; and, on the other hand, SE
students
have

difficulty

self-guiding

their

understanding

and

explaining

abstract
information in their own words (Rittle-Johnson & Loehr, 2016).
For
future

research

we

recommend

the

use

of

materials

of

different

levels

of
abstraction and even feedback rules to reduce the effect of prior knowledge errors. To
eliminate
a

possible

interference

effect

of

complexity

or

lack

of

knowledge

of

the
technique in learning, it would also be convenient to use some training sessions in the use
of self-explanations (SE) and answering open-ended questions (AOQ).
In
conclusion,

this

research

on

learning

techniques

from

texts

has

important
theoretical and educational implications. To teach complex declarative knowledge (e.g.,
scientific knowledge) students' understanding should be guided through questions (AOQ).
Questions
promote

deeper

processing

of

the text and

SE technique

focus

the

student's
attention
only

on

the

text.

There

is

evidence

that

answering

open-ended

(AOQ)

is

a
common
learning

technique

in

classrooms

(Ness,

2011;

Sanchez

&

Garcia,

2015);
however, it is necessary to emphasize the correction of conceptual errors and the use of