The social dimension of learning through argumentation: Effects of human presence and discourse style.

Christa S. C. Asterhan · Miriam Babichenko

63 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Educational Psychology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Science Education and Pedagogy Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods Educational Strategies and Epistemologies

Abstract

In spite of its potential for learning, and in particular knowledge revision, argumentation on science concepts is neither easily elicited nor easily sustained. Students may feel uneasy critiquing and being critiqued, especially on complex science topics. We report on a controlled study that tested the role of 2 potential factors that may either relieve or aggravate some of these concerns: the partner’s argumentative discourse style (disputative or deliberative) and belief in interaction with a human or a computer agent. Learners interacted in scripted, computer-mediated interactions with a confederate on their understanding of a scientific concept they had just studied (i.e., diffusion). They were led to believe they were either interacting with a human peer or with a conversational peer agent. The peer confederate’s verbal behavior was scripted to evoke argumentative discourse, while controlling for exposure to conceptual content and the type of dialogue moves, but differed in argumentative discourse style (disputative or deliberative). Results show that conceptual understanding of participants in the deliberative discourse style condition was higher than that in the disputative condition. Further, even though previous studies have reported that the belief in human interaction benefits learning in consensual interactions, the opposite was found to be true in a setting of disagreement and critique: Belief in interaction with a computer agent resulted in higher conceptual learning gains, compared to belief in interaction with a human peer. Implications for theory as well as instructional design are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 63 citations exist upstream.

References

1977The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data 1987Politeness : Some Universals in Language Usage 2009Active‐Constructive‐Interactive: A Conceptual Framework for Differentiating Learning Activities 1993The Role of Anomalous Data in Knowledge Acquisition: A Theoretical Framework and Implications for Science Instruction 2001Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics 2007Dialogue and the Development of Children's Thinking: A Sociocultural Approach 2010Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of Collaborative, Critical Discourse 2005Commonsense Conceptions of Emergent Processes: Why Some Misconceptions Are Robust

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.