Scientific Competencies in the Social Sciences

Dietrich, Heike; Zhang, Ying; Klopp, Eric; Brünken, Roland; Krause, Ulrike-Marie; Spinath, Frank M.; Stark, Robin; Spinath, Birgit

doi:10.1177/1475725715592287

Cited by 15 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Klieme and Leutner (2006), competences are context-specific cognitive dispositions necessary to cope with situations and demands in specific domains. In their model of scientific competences in the social sciences, Dietrich et al (2015) conceptualize explanation as a cognitive process in which a causal relation is constructed. Following these two lines of reasoning, we define explanation competence as a context-specific cognitive disposition that enables a person to construct a causal model (see Kim, 1994) of an observable psychological phenomenon (like cognitive dissonance) by drawing on psychological theories.…”

Section: Explanation Competence and Learning From Worked Examplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using psychological theories to explain psychological phenomena or, simply put, explaining a psychological phenomenon, is not only a part of the definition of psychology as a science (e.g., Gerrig & Zimbardo, 2010), but also a component of scientific competence in psychology (Dietrich et al., 2015). In psychology teaching, learning the content of scientific theories is emphasized, especially for novice students (see Birke, Rosman & Mayer, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Learning Scientific Explanations by Means of Worked Examples – Promoting Psychology Students’ Explanation Competence

Klopp

Stark

2018

Psychology Learning & Teaching

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study is to investigate whether worked examples are effective in fostering psychology students' explanation competence. Explanation competence is a context-specific cognitive disposition that enables a person to construct a causal model of an observable psychological phenomenon by drawing on psychological theories. We set up a training intervention using worked examples to demonstrate how the observed psychological phenomenon (e.g., cognitive dissonance) is represented in an explanation. Instructional support was implemented using a fading procedure. We investigated the effects of worked examples on explanation competence using a sample of psychology students (n ¼ 46) from a German university. In an experimental between-group pre-and post-tests design, the participants in the experimental condition received the training intervention, whereas the participants in a control condition did not receive the intervention. The experimental and control groups did not differ in their explanation competence before the training intervention. Participants in the experimental condition had a significant higher explanation competence after the training intervention than the participants in the control condition. Thus, our results indicate that worked examples effectively foster psychology students' explanation competence. Considerations on how the results could be implemented in actual teaching settings are provided.

show abstract

Section: Explanation Competence and Learning From Worked Examplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning Scientific Explanations by Means of Worked Examples – Promoting Psychology Students’ Explanation Competence

Klopp

Stark

2018

Psychology Learning & Teaching

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Acquiring scientific argumentation competence is a major goal of higher education study programs (Dietrich et al, 2015). In general, argumentation refers to the use of arguments for the sake of supporting a certain claim with a reason to persuade others of the claim's validity (Lumer, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, the former example in Type 2 form is "Studies found that extrovert people show a statistically higher amount of social contacts with strangers than introvert people, thus extroverts are more likely to have social contacts with strangers." In the context of a competencybased approach, the use of scientific evidence to support claims can be described as a domain-specific disposition (cf., Klieme and Leutner, 2006;Dietrich et al, 2015) that is acquired within a study program. Thus, the correct use of argumentation is a competence which is hereafter referred to as argumentation competence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning to Argue From Others’ Erroneous Arguments – Fostering Argumentation Competence Through Learning From Advocatory Errors

Klopp

Stark

2020

Front. Educ.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Argumentation competence is an essential skill to be acquired in university education. However, there is a lack of advanced argumentation competence even for graduate students. To foster argumentation competence, typical interventions focus on examplebased learning. Another approach is learning from advocatory errors. The combination of both approaches is presenting examples of erroneous arguments. Drawing on the concept of case-based learning, we developed a learning intervention that presents examples of argumentation errors in story-based designs, i.e., the erroneous examples are embedded in a story featuring the argumentation between two persons in an authentic setting. In this contribution, we report the results of two studies. In a first study, we compared an experimental condition receiving a story-based learning intervention with a control condition without a learning intervention. We found that learning from advocatory errors in a story-based design fosters students' argumentation competence. In a second study, we compared two forms of instructional support (elaboration vs. testing prompts) against a control condition without instructional support. There was a significant increase in argumentation competence in both conditions with instructional support but not in the control condition. The results also support the cautious conclusion that elaboration prompts seem to be more effective than testing prompts. Overall, the results from both studies indicate that the story-based design is apt to foster students' argumentation competence. We also considered the impact of prior argumentation competence and found in both studies that the present level of argumentation competence is a factor determining the argumentation competence after learning.

show abstract

“…The enculturation in the domain therefore leads to epistemological beliefs that are not favorable for the development of sophisticated argumentation skills (cf., Kuhn, 2001). Taken for granted that scientific argumentation skills are a centerpiece of scientific competencies (cf., Dietrich et al, 2015;Fischer et al, 2016), it seems therefore necessary to foster psychology students' evaluatist epistemological beliefs systematically. This article presents the evaluation of a computer-based version of the epistemological belief instruction by Rosman, Mayer, Peter and Krampen (2016) to foster evaluativist epistemological beliefs in psychology students.…”

Section: Introduction and Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific controversies and epistemological sensitization - Effects of an intervention on psychology students’ epistemological beliefs and argumentation skills

Klopp¹,

Stark²

2019

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study investigates the effects of an intervention presenting resolvable, scientific controversies and an epistemological sensitization measure on the changes in psychology students’ epistemological beliefs. Drawing on the notion that the presentation of resolvable scientific controversies induces epistemological doubt and the notion that inducing epistemological doubt is eased in the presence of an epistemological sensitization, we used an epistemological beliefs intervention consisting of five resolvable controversies that was applied in a sample consisting of psychology students. We hypothesized that the intervention will reduce absolutist and multiplicist epistemological beliefs will at the same increasing evaluatist beliefs. We also assumed that the epistemological sensitization would enhance the effect of the intervention. For a domain-specific questionnaire, the results indicated a reduction of absolutist epistemological beliefs regardless of the presence of the epistemological sensitization. Unexpectedly, there was backfire indicated by a rise of multiplicist beliefs. For a domain- and topic-specific questionnaire there was no significant reduction of absolutist and multiplicist beliefs but a significant increase in evaluatist beliefs when the epistemological sensitization was present. Finally, a measure assessing argumentation skills revealed an increase in argumentation skills only when the epistemological sensitization is present. Implications and limitations will be discussed.

show abstract

Scientific Competencies in the Social Sciences

Cited by 15 publications

References 4 publications

Learning Scientific Explanations by Means of Worked Examples – Promoting Psychology Students’ Explanation Competence

Learning Scientific Explanations by Means of Worked Examples – Promoting Psychology Students’ Explanation Competence

Learning to Argue From Others’ Erroneous Arguments – Fostering Argumentation Competence Through Learning From Advocatory Errors

Scientific controversies and epistemological sensitization - Effects of an intervention on psychology students’ epistemological beliefs and argumentation skills

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About