25
AE
.526**
.431**
.563**
RPA
- .381*
- .526**
- .043
nElab0
AE
- .010
- .090
.103
Discussion and conclusions
There
are

learning

techniques

that

influence

processing

strategies

and

thus

the
formation of the mental representation of the text (Lehman & Schraw, 2002; McCrudden,
Schraw, & Kambe, 2005; van den Broek et al., 2001). In this study, the processing and
effectiveness of self-explanations (SE) and answering open-ended questions (AOQ) with
the available text have been analyzed. Our specific interest is to compare the processing
induced by both techniques, as well as their efficacy for learning.
This study assumed that the technique of AOQ and SE favoured different patterns
of text processing. Thus, SE students would focus on textual information (Rittle-Johnson
&
Loehr,

2016),

while

AOQ

students

would

use

textual

information

and

information
beyond the text (e.g., prior knowledge). The results confirmed this hypothesis. SE students
used
significantly

more

paraphrases

(nTotPar)

than

AOQ

students.

In

contrast,

AOQ
students showed a more balanced profile between the use of paraphrases (nTotPar) and
elaborations (nTotElab). This indicates that the SE technique focuses students' attention
on memorizing textual information, while the AOQ technique encourages students to use
superficial and deep comprehension strategies.
The
better

balance

in

processing

between

textual

(i.e.,

paraphrase)

and

extra-
textual (i.e., elaborations) comprehension strategies that characterizes AOQ students may
be due to different types of questions (Cerdán et al., 2009; Ozgungor y Guthrie, 2004).
AOQ students answered questions based on textual information (TB questions) but also,
they answered questions based on hypothetical situations that required an application of
the
knowledge

learned

(SM

questions).

Therefore,

it

was

also

hypothesized

that

AOQ
students
would

present

more

elaborations

(nTotElab)

than

SE

students.

The

results
confirmed
this

hypothesis.

Thus,

AOQ

technique

activates

processes

of

transfer

or
application of prior knowledge and SE technique do not make it easier for the student to
go beyond the text.
On the other hand, contrary to existing literature (Cerdán et al., 2009; Ozgungor
&
Guthrie,

2004)

and

the

hypothesis

suggested,

the

greater

number

of

elaborations
(nTotElab)
presented

by

AOQ

students

was

not related

to

greater

learning

of

the

text
(LearnPost).
In

AOQ

condition,

the

results

reported

that

superficial

comprehension
strategies (nTotPar and nPar1) were significantly related to the TB questions