In this article, we examine the cognitive processes that are involved when readers comprehend conflicting information in multiple texts. Starting from the notion of routine validation during comprehension, we argue that readers' prior beliefs may lead to a biased processing of conflicting information and a one-sided mental model of controversial issues (text-belief consistency effect). An important distinction is that such biases occur routinely as a by-product of basic comprehension processes. However, readers can actively engage in strategies that work against the biasing effects of prior beliefs when they possess the relevant cognitive resources and are motivated to activate them. A review of published studies that examined belief effects in multiple text comprehension supports the two-step model of validation. We discuss implications of this model for multiple text comprehension and educational practice and delineate directions for future research.