本研究旨在探討閱讀不同觀點文本的順序對於閱讀理解歷程的影響，同時驗證景觀模式（Landscape Model）模擬人類讀者表現的有效性。本研究選擇「ADHD是否該用藥」為議題，編寫出「支持用藥」與「反對用藥」觀點的文章，並且經由操弄閱讀不同觀點文章的順序，檢驗多種閱讀理解的指標。研究對象為70位大學生讀者，依照閱讀不同文章觀點的順序區分為兩組，每組各35人。受試者在閱讀文章之前先進行先備知識測驗，之後再進行自由回憶、閱讀理解測驗與閱讀廣度測驗，讀者在電腦上依照自己正常的速度逐句閱讀，並且記錄閱讀時間。本研究也利用景觀模式模擬讀者的閱讀歷程，所有文本逐句區分成閱讀循環，並且切斷出重要的概念節點，再依該程式預設狀態設定激發來源與參數值，以程式執行之後產生之激發矩陣與連結矩陣為該模式的輸出，並進一步分析與大學生表現的關係。結果顯示，讀者閱讀不同立場的文章順序不會影響其回憶量；首次閱讀到不同觀點文章當中重複出現的句子所需時間顯著長於第二次的閱讀時間，說明閱讀順序對於相同句子的閱讀時間有影響；不同的閱讀順序的讀者之用藥態度沒有差異；景觀模式的連結矩陣與讀者回憶量有顯著相關，特定版本的模式之文本概念的總激發值也與語句的閱讀時間有關聯，該模式可以有效地模擬讀者閱讀多文本的歷程與表徵。 The purpose of this study was to investigate how the order of reading texts with different perspectives affects comprehension by examining human performance and cognitive modeling. We constructed two expository texts with different perspectives on the same topic, i.e., “Medications for ADHD” versus ” No medications for ADHD”. 70 college readers were recruited and randomly assigned into two groups and they read these two texts in different order sentence by sentence on computer in a self-paced manner. Reading time, recall data and their stances toward medications for ADHD were collected in addition to several cognitive measures. In preparing for cognitive modeling, we parse the texts and into main ideas for each sentence and identify sources and values of activation as defaulted by the Landscape model (Tzeng, 2007). The outputs of the Landscape modeling, activation matrix and sum of activation values for each node, were compared with human performance to determine their relations. The results of human performance indicated that the order of reading texts with different perspectives did not affect the amount of recall. Reading times for those sentences common for these two different texts were significantly longer they appeared in the first-read text than those in the second-read text, indicating the effect of order. Readers’ stances for the issue in focus were the same for the two groups. The results of the Landscape modeling showed that connection matrix values correlated significantly with human recall. Sum of activation values for some versions of the Landscape model also correlated with readers’ sentence reading times. These patterns have demonstrated that the Landscape model were able to capture the processes and memory representation of comprehending multiple texts.