Better to Agree or Disagree? The Role of Critical Questioning and Elaboration in Argumentative Discourse
Abstract
Zusammenfassung. Beim Umgang mit wissenschaftsbezogenen Informationen im Internet spielt der argumentative Austausch mit anderen eine immer zentralere Rolle. Als besonders förderlich für den Wissenserwerb durch argumentativen Diskurs haben sich das kritische Hinterfragen und Elaborieren der Information des Partners erwiesen. In der vorliegenden Studie wurde untersucht, wie diese lernförderlichen Kommunikationsaktivitäten im argumentativen Diskurs über wissenschaftsbezogene Informationen gefördert werden können. In einem 1 × 2 Zwischengruppendesign wurde entweder ein Unterschieds- oder ein Gemeinsamkeitenfokus erzeugt, indem Dyaden instruiert wurden, während der Diskussion eines wissenschaftsbezogenen Themas insbesondere auf Unterschiede oder auf Gemeinsamkeiten in den Sichtweisen und Argumenten zu achten. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass ein Fokus auf Unterschiede sich förderlich auf die Qualität des argumentativen Diskurses sowie auf das individuelle kritische Denken auswirkte. Die intrinsische Motivation hinsichtlich der Zusammenarbeit mit dem Partner und der Aufgaben war hingegen bei einem Gemeinsamkeitenfokus höher. Implikationen für die Verbesserung der Qualität argumentativer Diskurse und die Förderung des individuellen kritischen Denkens werden diskutiert.
Abstract. Dealing with scientific information on the Internet is an increasingly communicative activity. Two discourse features have been found to impact on the effectiveness of argumentative discourse activities: Critically questioning and elaborating on the partner's information. The present study investigated how these functional communication activities can be supported in argumentative discourses on scientific information. In a 1 × 2 between-subjects design, we established either a difference or a similarity focus by instructing dyads to pay attention to either differences or similarities in views and arguments while discussing the topic. Results showed that focusing on differences had beneficial effects on the quality of argumentative discourse as well as on individual critical thinking. However, on a socio-motivational level, participants' intrinsic motivation regarding the cooperation with the discourse partner and working on the tasks was higher when focusing on similarities. Implications for improving argumentative discourse and thereby fostering individuals’ critical thinking skills are discussed.
References
(1978). Wie verständlich sind unsere Zeitungen [How understandable are our newspapers]? Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Universität Zürich, Psychologisches Institut, Zürich, Switzerland.
(2006). Arguing to learn. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 443–459). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
(2009). Argumentation and explanation in conceptual change: Indications from protocol analyses of peer-to-peer dialog. Cognitive Science , 33 , 374–400. doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01017.x
(2002). Können Schüler und Lehrer kritisch denken? Lösungserfolg und -strategien bei typischen Aufgaben. Salzburger Beiträge zur Erziehungswissenschaft , 6 (2), 51–61.
(2008). Mixed-effect modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language , 59 (4), 390–412. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
(2002). Critical thinking and science education. Science & Education , 11 , 361–375. doi: 10.1023/A:1016042608621
(2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language , 68 (3), 255–278. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
(2015). The learning benefits of being willing and able to engage in scientific argumentation. International Journal of Science Education , 37 , 1590–1612. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2015.104595
(1983). Measuring the developmental features of moral discussion. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly , 29 , 399–410.
(1968). Läsbarhet [Readability] . Stockholm, Sweden: Liber.
(1971). The attraction paradigm . New York: Academic Press.
(1997). An overview (and underview) of research and theory within the attraction paradigm. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships , 14 , 417–431.
(1997). Knowledge-building as a mediator of conflict in conceptual change. Cognition and Instruction , 15 (1), 1–40.
(1996). Constructing self-explanations and scaffolded explanations in tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology , 10 (7), 33–49.
(1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. The Journal of the Learning Sciences , 6 , 271–315.
(2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science , 1 (1), 73–105. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005
(2008). Student's questions: A potential resource for teaching and learning science. Studies in Science Education , 44 (1), 1–39. doi: 10.1080/03057260701828101
(2013). Learning through collaborative argumentation. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, C. A. Chinn, C. K. Chan, A. O'Donnell, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, C. A. Chinn, … A. O'Donnell (Eds.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 314–332). New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
(2008). Attitudinal ambivalence and message-based persuasion: Motivated processing of proattitudinal information and avoidance of counterattitudinal information. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 34 , 565–577. doi: 10.1177/0146167207312527
(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
(2007). Dialogue as medium (and message) for training critical thinking. In R. R. Hoffman (Ed.), Expertise out of context: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Naturalistic Decision Making (pp. 219–260). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
(2000). Enhancement and analysis of science question level for middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 37 , 210–224.
(1984). The social development of intellect . Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
(2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education , 84 , 287–312.
(2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education , 38 (1), 39–72.
(1991). Critical thinking: A streamlined conception. Teaching Philosophy , 14 (1), 5−24.
(1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction . Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
(2001). The development of argumentive discourse skill. Discourse Processes , 32 , 135–153. doi: 10.1207/S15326950DP3202&3_03
(1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance . Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
(1950). Social pressure in informal groups . New York: Harper and Row.
(2002). Fostering collaborative knowledge construction with visualization tools. Learning and Instruction , 12 , 213–232. doi: 10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00005-6
(2011). Critical thinking: An introduction ( 2nd ed. ). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
(1991). Social cognition ( 2nd ed.) . New York: McGraw-Hill.
(1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology , 32 , 221–233. doi: 10.1037/h0057532
(2013). The effect of argumentative task goal on the quality of argumentative discourse. Science Education , 97 , 497–523. doi: 10.1002/sce.21057
(2008). Enhancing online collaborative argumentation through question elaboration and goal instructions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning , 24 , 167–180. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00251.x
(1994). Question asking during tutoring. American Educational Research Journal , 31 (1), 104–137.
(2000). On the assessment of situational intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS). Motivation and Emotion , 24 , 175–213. doi: 10.1023/A:1005614228250
(2011). Group cohesion, achievement motivation, and motivational outcomes among female college students. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology , 23 , 175–188. doi: 10.1080/10413200.2010.548847
(2002). Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing . Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
(2005). Communicating mathematically: Comparison of knowledge structures in teacher and student discourse in a secondary math classroom. Communication Education , 54 (1), 34–51. doi: 10.1080/146131905000 77002
(2014). The complex relationship between students' critical thinking and epistemological beliefs in the context of problem solving. Frontline Learning Research , 2 (4), 1–24.
(2011). Perspective taking in computer-mediated instructional communication. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications , 23 , 192–199. doi: 10.1027/1864-1105/a000056
(2013). Different words for the same concept: Learning collaboratively from multiple documents. Cognition and Instruction 31 , 497–518. doi: 10.1080 /07370008.2013.769993
(1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research , 66 , 181–221.
(2006). Collaboration scripts: A conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review , 18 , 159–185.
(2003). CSCL, argumentation, and Deweyan inquiry: Argumentation is learning. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 261–269). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
(1999). Interest, motivation and learning: An educational-psychological perspective. European Journal of Psychology of Education , 14 (1), 23–40. doi: 10.1007/BF03173109
(2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology ( 2nd ed. ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
(2008). Arguing on the computer: A microgenetic study of developing argument skills in a computer-supported environment. Child Development , 79 , 1310–1328. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01190.x
(2003). The development of argument skills. Child Development , 74 , 1245–1260. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00605
(2007). Coordinating own and other perspectives in argument. Thinking & Reasoning , 13 , 90–104. doi: 10.1080/13546780600625447
(1996). Agreeing to disagree: Developing sociable mathematical discourse. In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), Handbook of human development in education (pp. 731–764). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
(2003). Evaluating and selecting counterarguments. Written Communication , 20 , 269–306.
(2007). The impact of presentation format, task assignment, and prior knowledge on students' comprehension of multiple online documents. Journal of Literacy Research , 39 , 445–470. doi: 10.1080/10862960701675317
(2001). Introducing talk and writing for conceptual change: A classroom study. Learning and Instruction , 11 , 305–329. doi: 10.1016/S0959-4752(00)00035-9
(Eds.). (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future . London, UK: King's College London.
(2008). Is actual similarity necessary for attraction? A meta-analysis of actual and perceived similarity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships , 25 , 889–922. doi: 10.1177/0265407508096700
(2009). How to support learning from multiple hypertext sources. Behavior Research Methods , 41 , 639–646. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.3.639
(1999). The place of argument in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education , 21 , 553–576.
(1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology , 2 , 175–220. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
(2003). Approaching and avoiding arguments: The role of epistemological beliefs, need for cognition, and extraverted personality traits. Contemporary Educational Psychology , 28 , 573–595. doi: 10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00062-0
(2007). Promoting argument-counterargument integration in students' writing. Journal of Experimental Education , 76 (1), 59–92. doi: 10.3200/JEXE.76.1.59-92
(2003). Argument and conceptual engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology , 28 , 384–395. doi: 10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00038-3
(2012). Common ground? How the encoding of specialist vocabulary impacts on peer-to-peer online discourse. Discourse Processes , 49 , 565–598 . doi: 10.1080/0163853X.2012.711671
(2012). Learning through online peer discourse: Structural equation modeling points to the role of discourse activities in individual understanding. Computers & Education , 58 , 1127–1137. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.008
(1995). Pragmatics and pedagogy: Conversational rules and politeness strategies may inhibit effective tutoring. Cognition and Instruction , 13 , 161–188.
(2006). Denken und Emotionen [Thinking and emotions]. In J. Funke & P. A. Frensch (Eds.), Handbuch der Allgemeinen Pychologie – Kognition (Handbuch der Psychologie, Band 4 , pp. 475–484). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
(2008). The role of cognitive and socio-cognitive conflict in learning. Mind & Society , 7 (1), 1–19. doi: 10.1007/s11299-007-0029-3
(1987). Knowledge telling and knowledge transforming in written composition. In S. Rosenberg & S. Rosenberg (Eds.), Advances in applied psycholinguistics, Vol. 1: Disorders of first-language development; Vol. 2: Reading, writing, and language learning (pp. 142–175). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
(2014). Promoting critical, elaborative discussions through a collaboration script and argument diagrams. Instructional Science , 42 , 127–157. doi: 10.1007/s11251-013-9274-5
(1991). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Educational Technology , 31 (5), 24–33.
(2007). The CAEB: An instrument for measuring connotative aspects of epistemological beliefs. Learning and Instruction , 17 , 773–785. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.016
(1997). Talking about reasoning: How important is the peer in peer collaboration? In L. B. Resnick, R. Säljö, C. Pontecorvo, & B. Burge (Eds.), Discourse, tools and reasoning: Essays on situated cognition (pp. 361–384). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
(2015). “Probably true” says the expert: How two types of lexical hedges influence students' evaluation of scientificness. European Journal of Psychology of Education , 30 , 369–384. doi: 10.1007/s10212-014-0243-4
(2004). A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
(2014). 79 Prozent der Deutschen online – Zuwachs bei mobiler Internetnutzung und Bewegtbild. Ergebnisse der ARD/ZDF-Onlinestudie 2014 [79 percent of Germans are online – Increase in mobile Internet use and moving images. Results of the 2014 ARD/ZDF online study]. Media Perspektiven , 7–8 , 378–396.
(1995). Commitment in dialogue. Basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning . Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
(2008). Argumentation schemes . New York: Cambridge University Press.
(2006). Fundamentals of critical argumentation . New York: Cambridge University Press.
(2007). Watson – Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA). Deutsche Adaptation. Übersetzt und bearbeitet von A. Sourisseaux, T. Felsing, C. Müller, S. Stübig, J. Schmücker, G. Heyde [German adaptation of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA)] . Frankfurt am Main: Harcourt Test Services GmbH.
(1997). Prompting teachers' constructive reflection: Pupils' questions and critical incidents. International Journal of Science Education , 19 , 1025–1037.
(2009). The teacher's role in promoting collaborative dialogue in the classroom. British Journal of Educational Psychology , 79 (1), 1–28.
(2005). A fair and balanced look at the news: What affects memory for controversial arguments?. Journal of Memory and Language , 53 (1), 95–109. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2005.02.001
(1999). Constructing arguments from multiple sources: Tasks that promote understanding and not just memory for text. Journal of Educational Psychology , 91 , 301–311. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.301
