AllmanW. F. (1985, October). Staying alive in the 20th century, Science, 85, pp. 38–41.
2.
AndersonC. W.SmithE. L (1984). Children's preconceptions and content-area textbooks. In DuffyG.RoehlerL.MasonJ. (Eds.). Comprehension instruction (pp. 187–201). NY: Longman.
3.
ClarkR. A. (1984). Persuasive messages.NY: Harper & Row.
4.
DavisonA. (1984). Readability formulas and comprehension. In DuffyG.RoehlerL.MasonJ. (Eds.). Comprehension instruction (pp. 128–143). NY: Longman.
5.
DurantJ. R.EvansG. A.ThomasG. P. (1989, July 6). The public understanding of science. Nature, 340, 11–14.
6.
HegartyM.JustM. A. (in press). Understanding machines from text and diagrams. In HandlH.LevinJ. (Eds.). Knowledge acquisition from text and pictures.Amsterdam: Elsevier.
7.
HewsonM. G.HewsonP. W. (1983). Effect of instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 731–743.
8.
HewsonP. W.HewsonM. G. (1984). The role of conceptual conflict in conceptual change and the design of science instruction. Instructional Science, 13, 1–13.
9.
HyndC.AlvermannD. W. (1986). The role of refutation text in overcoming difficulties with science concepts. Journal of Reading, 29, 440–446.
10.
JaroffL.NashJ. M.ThompsonD.WymelenbergS. (1988, May 23). The battle inside your body. Time, pp. 56–64.
11.
LarkinJ. H.SimonH. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth a thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65–99.
12.
LeapD. I. (1988, July 2). Letters [to the editor]: Setting a story straight. The Lafayette [Ind.] Journal and Courier, p. A-8.
13.
LevinJ. R.AnglinG. J.CarneyR. N. (1987). On empirically validating functions of pictures in prose. In WillowsD. M.HoughtonH. A (Eds.). The psychology of illustration (Vol. 1 [pp. 51–85]). New York: Springer-Verlag.
14.
MacDougallC. D.ReidR. D. (1987). Interpretative reporting, 9th ed.NY: Macmillan.
15.
MayerR. E. (1983). What have we learned about increasing the meaningfulness of science prose?Science Education, 67, 223–237.
16.
MayerR. E. (1985a). Structural analysis of science prose: Can we increase problem-solving performance? In BrittonB. K.BlackJ. B (Eds.). Understanding expository text: A theoretical and practical handbook for analyzing explanatory text (pp. 65–87). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
17.
MayerR. E. (1985b). How to analyze science prose. In BrittonB. K.BlackJ. B (Eds.). Understanding expository text: A theoretical and practical handbook for analyzing explanatory text (pp. 305–313). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
18.
MayerR. E. (1989). Systematic thinking fostered by illustrations in scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 240–246.
19.
MerrillM. D.TennysonR. D. (1977). Teaching concepts: An instructional design guide.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
20.
MeyerB. J. F. (1985). Prose analysis: Purposes, procedures, problems. In BrittonB. K.BlackJ. B (Eds.). Understanding expository text: A theoretical and practical handbook for analyzing explanatory text (pp. 11–64). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
21.
MillerJ. D. (1983). Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus, 112, 29–48.
22.
RainsK. (1988, June 19). From the Teays to your tap. The Lafayette [Ind.] Journal and Courier, p. A-3.
23.
RowanK. E. (1988). A contemporary theory of explanatory writing. Written Communication, 5, 23–56.
24.
RussellC. (1986, June 2). America's scientific illiterates: Survey finds basic concepts misunderstood. Washington Post, pp. 1, 8.
25.
SachsmanD. B.GreenbergM. R.SandmanP. M. (Eds.) (1988). Environmental reporter's handbook.Newark, NJ: New Jersey Institute of Technology.
26.
ShymanskyJ. A.KyleW. C. (1988). A summary of research in science education—1986 [Special issue]. Science Education, 72 (3).
27.
StephensM.LawsonG. (1986). Writing & reporting the news.NY: Holt, Rinehart, Winston.
28.
SzlichcinskiK. P. (1979). Diagrams and illustrations as aids to problem solving. Instructional Sciences, 8, 253–274.
29.
TennysonR. D.CocchiarellaM. J. (1986). An empirically based instructional design theory for teaching concepts. Review of Educational Psychology, 56, 40–71.