Cited by 149Innovative Teaching and Learning MethodsEducational Strategies and EpistemologiesScience Education and Pedagogy

Collaborative argumentation and cognitive elaboration in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment

Stegmann, Karsten, Wecker, Christof, Weinberger, Armin, Fischer, Frank·2012·Instructional Science

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11251-011-9174-5

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • An engagement in covert, subject-matter related cognitive processes might be more responsible for subject-matter-related knowledge.

    “an engagement in covert, subjectmatter related cognitive processes might be more responsible for subject-matterrelated knowledge (e.g., Stegmann et al., 2012).”

    From Enhancing the Peer-Feedback Process Through Instructional Support: A Meta-Analysis (2025) · cites this paper as Stegmann et al., 2012

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 55 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stegmann, K., Wecker, C., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F.
Affiliations
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • Saarland University (DE)
Corresponding author
Stegmann, Karsten
Venue
Instructional Science
Published
2011-07-15
Volume
40
Issue
2
Pages
297-323
ISSN
  • 0020-4277 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-1952
OpenAlex
W2103258272
Cited by
149
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 5
FWCI
16.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Instructional Science (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
Keywords
collaborative argumentation, cognitive elaboration, computer-supported collaborative learning, online discourse, deep processing, argumentation instruction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review