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.

Zeitschriftenaufsatz | Veröffentlicht | Englisch
 
Download
Es wurde kein Volltext hochgeladen. Nur Publikationsnachweis!
Autor/in
; ; ; ;
Abstract / Bemerkung
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.
Stichworte
epistemic competences; think-aloud procedure; Informal argument; evaluation; mental model theory; competences in higher education
Erscheinungsjahr
2016
Zeitschriftentitel
Thinking & Reasoning
Band
22
Ausgabe
2
Seite(n)
221-249
ISSN
1354-6783
eISSN
1464-0708
Page URI
https://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/record/2902110

Zitieren

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. doi:10.1080/13546783.2015.1127289
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.