The current study explores the extent to which different processing strategies affect comprehension accuracy and integration of information across multiple texts. Reading comprehension of single texts is a difficult task, in which the challenges are compounded by the need to integrate information across texts. Processing strategies, such as self-explanation and source-evaluation, help reduce the challenges that readers face when attempting to comprehend texts. Self-explanation has been a successful strategy for coherence-building processes in single text comprehension, but the benefits for supporting inter-textual comprehension have not yet been explored. Source-evaluation supports identification of different sources, which helps resolve inconsistencies between texts; yet it remains unclear whether sourcing alone supports comprehension within as well as between texts. Think-aloud is a strategy intended to encourage further processing of the text without providing any explicit comprehension strategy. The differences between these two strategies prompts questions regarding the adequacy of either strategy for supporting inferencing and integration within and across texts. In this study, participants (n=80) were randomly assigned to one of three strategy conditions: self-explanation, source-evaluation, or think-aloud. Students read four texts after which they completed three types of open-ended comprehension questions (i.e., textbase, intra-textual inference, and inter-textual inference), a source memory task, and individual difference measures. Prior knowledge and reading skill were strongly correlated (r = .65) and showed moderate correlations (r = .31 to .60) with participants’ comprehension accuracy, total number of integrations within their responses, and their memory for sources. Participants were more likely to respond accurately and demonstrate integrations across texts for the text-based questions in comparison to the more challenging inference questions. There was a marginal effect of condition on comprehension question accuracy, wherein participants who self-explained responded more accurately than those who engaged in the think-aloud task. In addition, those in the self-explanation or source-evaluation conditions recalled more sources than those in the think-aloud condition. There were no significant differences in performance between the self-explanation and the source-evaluation conditions. Overall, the results of this study indicate that encouraging students to self-explain and/or evaluate sources while they read multiple documents enhances comprehension and memory for sources.