This article reports the results of a study investigating how undergraduates evaluate realistic scientific data in the domains of geology and paleontology. The results are used to test several predictions of a theory of data evaluation, which we call models-of-data theory. Models-of-data theory assumes that when evaluating data, the individual constructs a particular kind of cognitive model that integrates many features of the data with a theoretical interpretation of the data. The individual evaluates the model by attempting to generate alternative causal explanations for the events in the model. We contrast models-of-data theory with other proposals for how data are cognitively represented and show that models-of-data theory gives a good account of the pattern of written evaluations of data produced by the undergraduates in the study. We discuss theoretical and instructional implications of the theory.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 166 citations exist upstream.