Judging the plausibility of arguments in scientific texts: a student-scientist comparison

von der Muehlen S, Richter T, Schmid S, Schmidt EM, Berthold K (2016)
THINKING & REASONING 22(2): 221-249.

Journal Article | Published | English

No fulltext has been uploaded

Author
; ; ; ;
Abstract
The ability to evaluate scientific claims and evidence is an important aspect of scientific literacy and requires various epistemic competences. Readers spontaneously validate presented information against their knowledge and beliefs but differ in their ability to strategically evaluate the soundness of informal arguments. The present research investigated how students of psychology, compared to scientists working in psychology, evaluate informal arguments. Using a think-aloud procedure, we identified the specific strategies students and scientists apply when judging the plausibility of arguments and classifying common argumentation fallacies. Results indicate that students, compared to scientists, have difficulties forming these judgements and base them on intuition and opinion rather than the internal consistency of arguments. Our findings are discussed using the mental model theory framework. Although introductory students validate scientific information against their knowledge and beliefs, their judgements are often erroneous, in part because their use of strategy is immature. Implications for systematic trainings of epistemic competences are discussed.
Publishing Year
ISSN
eISSN
PUB-ID

Cite this

von der Muehlen S, Richter T, Schmid S, Schmidt EM, Berthold K. Judging the plausibility of arguments in scientific texts: a student-scientist comparison. THINKING & REASONING. 2016;22(2):221-249.
von der Muehlen, S., Richter, T., Schmid, S., Schmidt, E. M., & Berthold, K. (2016). Judging the plausibility of arguments in scientific texts: a student-scientist comparison. THINKING & REASONING, 22(2), 221-249.
von der Muehlen, S., Richter, T., Schmid, S., Schmidt, E. M., and Berthold, K. (2016). Judging the plausibility of arguments in scientific texts: a student-scientist comparison. THINKING & REASONING 22, 221-249.
von der Muehlen, S., et al., 2016. Judging the plausibility of arguments in scientific texts: a student-scientist comparison. THINKING & REASONING, 22(2), p 221-249.
S. von der Muehlen, et al., “Judging the plausibility of arguments in scientific texts: a student-scientist comparison”, THINKING & REASONING, vol. 22, 2016, pp. 221-249.
von der Muehlen, S., Richter, T., Schmid, S., Schmidt, E.M., Berthold, K.: Judging the plausibility of arguments in scientific texts: a student-scientist comparison. THINKING & REASONING. 22, 221-249 (2016).
von der Muehlen, Sarah, Richter, Tobias, Schmid, Sebastian, Schmidt, Elisabeth Marie, and Berthold, Kirsten. “Judging the plausibility of arguments in scientific texts: a student-scientist comparison”. THINKING & REASONING 22.2 (2016): 221-249.
This data publication is cited in the following publications:
This publication cites the following data publications:

Export

0 Marked Publications

Open Data PUB

Web of Science

View record in Web of Science®

Search this title in

Google Scholar