Websites
Biography
Dr. Virginia Clinton-Lisell began her career in education as an ESL teacher in New York City. She then obtained her PhD in Educational Psychology with a minor in Cognitive Science at the University of Minnesota where she was trained in educational research. She has published over 50 articles in education research and teaches courses in education research, program evaluation, and psychological foundations of education. Her current research focuses on the psychology of reading comprehension and open education.
She is a Rose Isabella Kelly Fischer Endowed Professor.
Follow on twitter at @drclintonlisell
Click here to hear how to pronounce my name.
EFR 509: Introduction to Educational Research
T&L 252: Child Development
EFR 511: Program Evaluation
EFR 501: Psychological Foundations of Education
- Psychology of Reading Comprehension
- Open Education
- Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
Clinton-Lisell, V. (2024). Feedback for learning from text: What kind and where in the text is most effective? Computers and Education Open, 7, 100216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100216
Clinton-Lisell, V. (in-press). Comparing quizzes and social annotation for pre-class reading accountability. Teaching of Psychology. Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241275218
Clinton-Lisell, V., & Litzinger, C. (2024). Is it really a neuromyth? A meta-analysis of the learning styles matching hypothesis. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1428732
Clinton-Lisell, V., Carlson, S.E., Ness-Maddox, H., Dahl, A., Taylor, T., Davison, M.L., & Seipel, B. (in-press). Identifying clusters of less-skilled college student readers based on cognitive processes. Journal of College Reading and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2024.2359513 full text here
Clinton-Lisell, V., & Langowski, A.M. (in-press). Reading medium and epistemic emotions in the continued influence effect of misinformation. Reading Psychology, http://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2024.2349307 full text here https://osf.io/3z7kp
Clinton-Lisell, V. & Anderson, R., (in-press). Between “you” and “me”: Effects of pronouns and order on disclosing sexual assault. The Journal of Sex Research. https:doi.org/ 10.1080/00224499.2024.2341426 full text here: https://osf.io/27a6n
Clinton-Lisell, V. & Kelly, A. E. (2024). The cost of doing homework: Online homework systems with access codes from a social justice perspective. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science (IJTES), 8(2), 296-310. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.547
Clinton-Lisell, V., Strouse, G., Langowski, A.M., (in-press). Children's engagement during shared reading of ebooks and paper books: A systematic review. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2023.100632
Clinton-Lisell, V. E., Roberts-Crews, J., & Gwozdz, L. (2023). SCOPE of Open Education: A New Framework for Research. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 24(4), 135–153. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v24i4.7356
Clinton-Lisell V. (2023). Social annotation: what are students’ perceptions and how does social annotation relate to grades? Research in Learning Technology, 31. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v31.3050
Clinton-Lisell, V. (2023). Does reading while listening to text improve comprehension compared to reading only? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Educational Research: Theory and Practice, 34(3), 133-155. http://www.nrmera.org/educational-research-theory-practice/current-issue/
Clinton-Lisell, V., & Kelly, A.E. (in-press). Are scientific memes motivating and does public sharing affect motivation? Psychology Learning & Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1177/14757257231197359
Clinton-Lisell, V., & Gwozdz, L. (in-press). Understanding student experiences of renewable and traditional assignments. College Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2023.2179591
Guthridge, R. & Clinton-Lisell, V. (2023) Evaluating the efficacy of virtual reality (VR) training devices for pilot training, Journal of Aviation Technology and Engineering, 12(2) Article 1. https://doi.org/10.7771/2159-6670.1286
Ness-Maddox, H., Carlson, S.E., Dahl, A.C., Kennedy, P.C., Davison, M.L., Seipel, B., & Clinton-Lisell, V. (in-press). Emotional factors of causal coherence in text comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2022.102141
Herbert, M., Clinton-Lisell, V., & Stupnisky, R.H. (in-press). Faculty motivation for OER textbook adoption and future use. Innovative Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-022-09625-6
Kelly, A.E., Laurin, J.N., Clinton-Lisell, V. (in-press). Making Psychology’s hidden figures visible using open educational resources: A replication and extension study. Teaching of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F00986283221108129
Lazzara, J., & Clinton-Lisell, V. (in-press). Using social annotation to enhance student engagement in psychology courses. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000335
Clinton-Lisell, V. (in-press). Investigating reading from screens and mind wandering in the context of standards of coherence. Scientific Studies of Reading. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2022.2125320
Seipel, B., Kennedy, P.C., Carlson, S.E., Clinton-Lisell, V., & Davison, M.L. (in-press). MOCCA-College: Preliminary evidence of a cognitive diagnostic reading comprehension assessment. Journal of Learning Disabilities. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F00222194221121340
Clinton-Lisell, V. (in-press). How does OER efficacy vary based on student age and course modality? American Journal of Distance Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2022.2077061
Clinton-Lisell, V., Taylor, T., Seipel, B., Carlson, S., & Davison, M. (in-press). Performance on reading comprehension assessments and college achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of College Reading and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2022.2062626
Clinton-Lisell, V. (in press). Listening ears or reading eyes: A meta-analysis of reading and listening comprehension comparisons. Review of Educational Research. https:doi.org/ 10.3102/00346543211060871
Clinton-Lisell, V. (in press). Reading medium and interest: Effects and interactions. Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2021.2016635
Clinton-Lisell, V. (2021). Stop multitasking and just read: Meta-analyses of multitasking’s effects on reading performance and reading time. Journal of Research in Reading, 44(4) 787-816. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12372
Clinton-Lisell, V., Seipel, B., Gilpin, S., & Litzinger, C. (in-press) Interactive features of e-texts’ effects on learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1943453
Clinton-Lisell, V. (2021). Open pedagogy: A systematic review of empirical findings. Journal of Learning for Development, 8(2), 255-268. https://jl4d.org/index.php/ejl4d/article/view/511
Fischer, L., Hilton, J. III, Clinton-Lisell, V., Xiong, Y., Wiley, D., & Williams, L. (2021). The interaction of Open Educational Resources (OER) use and course difficulty on student course grades in a community college. International Journal of Open Educational Resources, 4(1), Article 4. https://www.ijoer.org/the-interaction-of-open-educational-resources-oer-use-and-course-difficulty-on-student-course-grades-in-a-community-college/
Samson, R.L., Clinton-Lisell, V., & Fischer, L. (2021). Let students choose: Examining the impact of Open Educational Resources on performance in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 98(3), 745-755. https://doi.org/10.1021.acs.jcemed.0c00595
Maslowski, A. K., Owens, R. L., LaCaille, R. A., Clinton-Lisell, V. (in press). A systematic review and meta-analysis of motivational interviewing training effectiveness among students-in-training. Training and Education in Professional Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000363
Clinton-Lisell, V., Kelly, A.E., & Clark, T. (2020). Modeling e-textbook tools or encouraging reading from paper: What are the effects on medium choice and textbook use? College Teaching, 68(4), 221-227. http://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2020.1786665
Clinton, V., Taylor, T., Bajpayee, S., Seipel, B., Carlson, S.E., & Davison, M. (2020). Inferential comprehension differences between narrative and expository texts: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Reading and Writing, 33, 2223-2248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-020-10044-2
Clinton, V., & Kelly, A. E. (2020). Improving student attitudes toward discussion boards using a brief motivational intervention. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 6(4), 301–315. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000160
Clinton, V. & Kelly, A.E. (2020). Student attitudes toward group discussions. Active Learning in Higher Education, 21(2), 154-164. doi: 10.1177/1469787417740277 Video abstract here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phI5Ti5ML3M&t=1s
Clinton, V. (2019). Reading from paper compared to screens: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Reading. doi: 10.1111/1467-9817.12269
Walkington, C., Clinton, V., & Sparks, A. (2019). The effect of language modification of mathematics story problems on problem solving in online homework. Instructional Science, 47(5),499-529. doi: 10.1007/s11251-019-09481-6
Clinton, V., Legerski, E., & Rhodes, B. (2019). Comparing student learning from and perceptions of open and commercial textbook excerpt: A randomized experiment. Frontiers in Education, 4, art. 110, 1-12. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2019.00110
Clinton, V., & Khan, S. (2019). Efficacy of open textbook adoption on learning performance and course withdrawal rates: A meta-analysis. AERA Open, 5(3), 1-20. 10.1177/2332858419872212
Clinton, V. & Wilson, N. (2019). More than chalkboards: Classroom spaces and collaborative learning attitudes. Learning Environments Research, 22(3), 325-344. doi: 10.1007/s10984-019-09287-w
Clinton, V. & Walkington, C. (2019). Interest-enhancing approaches to mathematics curriculum design: Illustrations and personalization. The Journal of Educational Research, 112(4), 495-411. doi: 10.1080/00220671.2019.1568958
Clinton, V., Basaraba, D.L., & Walkington, C. (2018). English learners and mathematical word problem solving: A systematic review. In D.L. Baker, D.L. Basaraba, & C. Richards-Tutor (Eds.) Second language acquisition: Methods, perspectives and challenges (pp. 171-208).Nova Science Publishers.
Clinton, V. (2019). Cost, outcomes, use, and perceptions of Open Educational Resources in psychology: A narrative review of the literature. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 18(1), 4-20. doi: 10.1177/1475725718799511
Pier, E., Walkington, C., Clinton, V., Boncoddo, R., Williams-Pierce, C., Alibali, M.W., & Nathan, M., (2019). Embodied truths: How dynamic gestures and speech contribute to mathematical proof practices Contemporary Educational Psychology doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.01.012
Clinton, V., & Meester, S. (2019). A comparison of two in-class anxiety reduction exercises before a final exam. Teaching of Psychology, 46(1), 92-95. Doi: 10.1177/0098628318816182 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0098628318816182
Clinton, V. (2018). Savings without sacrifices: A case study of open-source textbook adoption. Open Learning: The Journal of Distance and Open Learning. doi: 10.1080/02680513.2018.1486184 Full text available: https://osf.io/by7jn/
Clinton, V., Swenseth, M., & Carlson, S.E. (2018). Do Mindful Breathing Exercises Benefit Reading Comprehension? A Brief Report. Journal of Cognitive Enhancement, 2(3), 305-310. doi: 10.1007/s41465-018-0067-2
Clinton, V. (2018). Reflections versus extended quizzes: Which is better for student learning and self-regulation? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 18(1). doi: 10.14434/josotl.v18i1.22508 Full text available at http://rdcu.be/Ht4t
Walkington, C., Clinton, V., & Shivraj, P. (2018). How readability factors are differentially associated with performance for students of different backgrounds when solving math word problems. American Educational Research Journal, 55(2), 362-414. . doi: 10.3102/0002831217737028
Williams, C.C., Pier, E., Walkington, C., Clinton, V., Boncoddo, R. Nathan, M., & Alibali, M. (2017). What we say and how we do: Action, gesture, and language in proving. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 48(3), 248-260. doi: 10.5951/jresematheduc.48.3.0248
Clinton, V., Cooper, J.L., Michaelis, J., Alibali, M.W., & Nathan, M.J. (2017). Revising visuals based on instructional design principles: Effects on cognitive load and learning. In C. Was, F.J. Sansosti, & B.J. Morris (Eds.) Eye-tracking technology applications in educational research, (pp. 195-218). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Seipel, B., Carlson, S.E., & Clinton, V. (2017). When do comprehender groups differ? A moment-by-moment analysis of think-aloud protocols of good and struggling comprehenders. Reading Psychology, 38, 39-70. doi: 10.1080/02702711.2016.1216489
Clinton, V., Alibali, M.W., & Nathan, M.J. (2016). Learning about posterior probability: Do diagrams and elaborative interrogations help? Journal of Experimental Education, 84, 579-599. doi: 10.1080/00220973.2015.1048847
Clinton, V., Morsanyi, K., Alibali, M.W., & Nathan, M.J. (2016). Learning about probability from text and tables: Do color coding and labeling through an interactive-user interface help? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30, 440-453. doi: 10.1002/acp.3223.
Clinton, V., Seipel, B., & Carlson, S.E. (2016). Linguistic markers of inference generation while reading. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 45, 553-574.. doi: 10.1007/s10936-015-9360-8
Walkington, C., Clinton, V., Ritter, S., & Nathan, M. J. (2015). How readability and topic incidence relate to performance on mathematics story problems in computer-based curricula. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(4), 1051-1074.
Clinton, V. (2015). Examining associations between reading motivation and inference generation beyond reading comprehension skill. Reading Psychology,36(6), 473-498. doi: 10.1080/02702711.2014.892040
Clinton, V. (2014). The relationship between approaches to learning and the process of learning: An examination of the 3P model. Instructional Science, 42(5), 817-837. doi: 10.1007/s11251-013-9308-z
Clinton, V., Seipel, B., van den Broek, P., McMaster, K.L., Kendeou, P., Carlson, S., & Rapp, D.N. (2014). Gender differences in inference generation by fourth-grade students. Journal of Research in Reading 37(4), 356-374. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2012.01531.x
Clinton, V. & van den Broek, P. (2012). Interest, inferences, and learning from texts. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(6), 650-663. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2012.07.004
2021-present Associate Professor, University of North Dakota, Educational Foundations and Research
2016-2021 Assistant Professor, University of North Dakota, Educational Foundations and Research
2014-2016 Instructor, University of North Dakota, Psychology and Teaching & Learning
2011-2014 Postdoctoral Research Associate, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin Center for Educational Research
2013-2014 Adjunct Instructor, Madison Area Technical College
2009-2010 Adjunct Instructor, Inver Hills Community College
2009 Graduate Teaching Assistant, University of Minnesota
2005-2006 Learning Instructor, University of Pennsylvania
2004-2005 Classroom teacher, PS 249K, Brooklyn, NY
Barr, N. (2024, June 1). Does listening to audiobooks count as reading? Real Simple. https://read.nxtbook.com/360mediadirect/real_simple/real_simple_june_2024/mimo_audiobooks.html
Gworzdz, L., & Clinton-Lisell, V. (2023, August 2). What are renewable assignments-and how do they help students? eCampus News. https://www.ecampusnews.com/teaching-learning/2023/08/02/renewable-assignments-students-diversity/
Whetter, J. (2023, January 6). Listen to me. Canola Digest. https://canoladigest.ca/january-2023/listen-to-me/
Clinton-Lisell, V. (2022, September 12). Go on, admit it. You’re multitasking. Here’s how to do it better. Psyche. https://psyche.co/ideas/go-on-admit-it-youre-multitasking-heres-how-to-do-it-better
Peters, J. (2022, August 29). E-books offer cost advantage, but retention may suffer. The Denver Channel. https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/national/e-books-offer-cost-advantage-but-retention-may-suffer
Ofgang, E. (2022, June 28). Reading comprehension can predict college success. Tech & Learning. https://www.techlearning.com/news/reading-comprehension-can-predict-college-success
Ofgang, E. (2022, May 16). How to get students to read for fun. Tech & Learning. https://www.techlearning.com/how-to/how-to-get-students-to-read-for-fun
Ofgang, E. (2022, March 21). Listen without guilt: Audiobooks offer similar comprehension as reading. Tech & Learning. https://www.techlearning.com/news/listen-without-guilt-audiobooks-offer-similar-comprehension-as-reading
Fitzpatrick, L. (2022, February 15). Screen-based reading vs. paper-based reading? What does the research say? Navigating your child’s education. Podcast. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/screen-based-reading-vs-paper-based-reading-what-does/id1534974320?i=1000551238005
Barshay, J. (2021, March 22). Paper beats pixels on most picture books, research finds. The Hechinger Report. https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-paper-beats-pixels-on-most-picture-books-research-finds/
Nelson-Strouts, K. (2020, June 23). Inferencing skills: Does text genre matter? The Informed Speech-Language Pathologist. Retrieved from https://www.theinformedslpmembers.com/reviews/inferencing-skills-does-text-genre-matter?rq=genre
Terada, Y. (2019, December 5). 2019 Education Research Highlights. Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/article/2019-education-research-highlights
Clinton, V. (2019, September 12). Reading from screens compared to paper: What are the differences? [Web log post] Retrieved from https://www.learningscientists.org/blog/2019/9/12-1
Bang, K. (2019, August 15). Paper and Screen Reading. Morning Wave Busan English Radio. Retrieved from http://www.befm.or.kr/radio/ProgramAction.do?cmd=PlayListMgr&prgmId=morning_sp&tab=PRGM_SCRIPT
Barshay, J. (2019, August 12). Evidence increases for reading on paper instead of screens. The Hechinger Report. Retrieved from https://hechingerreport.org/evidence-increases-for-reading-on-paper-instead-of-screens/
Miller, P. (2019, July 2). Reading beyond comprehension. UND Today. Retrieved from http://blogs.und.edu/und-today/2019/07/reading-beyond-comprehension/
Blair, K. (2019, May 23). What’s important to know about screens and reading? Carolina Journal. Retrieved from https://www.carolinajournal.com/opinion-article/whats-important-to-know-about-screens-and-reading/
Ralph, M. & Woodruff, L. (2019, May 12). Reading and Metacognition, 2 pint Professional Learning Communities, [Audio podcast] Retrieved from https://twopintplc.com/podcast-episode/027-reading-and-metacognition
Marshall, V. (2019, April 19). Text books versus technology? Which is better for student learning? Valley News Live. Retrieved from https://www.valleynewslive.com/content/news/Text-books-versus-technology-Which-is-better-for-student-learning-508828421.html
Rosenberg, C. (2019, April 17). Is print reading better than digital reading? Mother Nature News. Retrieved from https://www.mnn.com/green-tech/gadgets-electronics/stories/we-read-digital-text-differently-print
Thompson, A., & Weaver, C. (2019, April 17). Study: Paper Reading More Effective Than Screen Reading. Voice of America. Retrieved from https://learningenglish.voanews.com/a/study-paper-reading-more-effective-than-screen-reading/4876473.html
Herold, B. (2019, April 6). Screen reading word for comprehension, leads to overconfident, new meta-analysis concludes. Education Week. Retrieved from https://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/DigitalEducation/2019/04/screen_reading_worse_for_comprehension_metaanalysis.html?intc=main-mpsmvs
Mook, S. (2018, December 2). Open access textbooks help save students money, keep them in class, officials say. Grand Forks Herald, pp A1, A3. https://www.grandforksherald.com/news/education/4536605-open-access-textbooks-help-save-students-money-keep-them-class-officials-say
Newberry, D. (2017, October 4). Making more free books available to students. Dakota Student. Retrieved from
https://dakotastudent.com/10982/news/making-more-free-books-available-to-students/
Clinton, V. (2017, July 11). Elaborative interrogation-what if students can’t produce useful elaborations? [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.learningscientists.org/blog/2017/7/11-1