The DOI matches its Crossref record; 247 of the 255 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Argumentation for Learning: Well-Trodden Paths and Unexplored Territories
Abstract
There is increasing consensus among psycho-educational scholars about argumentation as a means to improve student knowledge and understanding of subject matter. In this article, we argue that, notwithstanding a strong theoretical rationale, causal evidence is not abundant, definitions of the objects of study (argumentation, learning) are often not well defined, and the variance in research methods is large. We argue that we systematically review the available research evidence by mapping it on the Argumentation For Learning research framework, which specifies the different antecedents, dialogue characteristics, and learning outcomes of argumentation. In doing so, we identify claims that are supported with substantive empirical evidence and demonstrate which questions are still open to further empirical examination. We also uncover several promising, relatively unexplored venues for future research.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Argumentative dialogue plays a central role in thinking and learning (Asterhan & Schwarz, 2016).”
From Teaching argumentative synthesis writing through deliberative dialogues: instructional practices in secondary education (2021) · cites this paper as Asterhan & Schwarz, 2016
Citations
Cites
Mindset: The New Psychology of Success
(2006) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.44-2397 · Cited by 7,804
Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts
Latour, B. (1986) · DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) · Cited by 7,491
Women's Ways of Knowing: The Development of Self, Voice, and Mind
Brookes, A.-L., Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1988) · Curriculum Inquiry · doi:10.2307/1179565 · Cited by 4,916
The online disinhibition effect
Suler, J. (2004) · CyberPsychology & Behavior · doi:10.1089/1094931041291295 · Cited by 4,375
Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children
Panagos, R. J. (1998) · Remedial and Special Education · doi:10.1177/074193259801900609 · Cited by 4,183
Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance.
Nicholls, J. G. (1984) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.91.3.328 · Cited by 4,161
Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children
(1996) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.33-3435 · Cited by 4,103
Talking science: language, learning, and values
Lemke, J. L. (1991) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.28-5211 · Cited by 4,001
Perspectives on socially shared cognition.
Resnick, L. B., Levine, J. M., & Teasley, S. D. (1991) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/10096-000 · Cited by 3,468
Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication
Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.39.10.1123 · Cited by 2,630
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Anderson, R. C., Chinn, C., Wagoner, M., & Nguyen, K. (1998). Intellectually stimulating story discussions. In J. Osborn & F. Lehr (Eds.), Literacy for all (pp. 170–186). New York, NY: Guilford.
- Asterhan, C. S. C., Butler, R., & Schwarz, B. B. (2010). Goals for learning and interaction in argumentation and conceptual change. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Learning in the Disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2010) - Volume 1. Chicago IL: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
- 10.1080/10508406.1998.967205 · DOI
- 10.2307/1176776 · DOI
- 10.1348/000709907×268589 · DOI
- Kuhn, D., Hemberger, L., & Khait, V. (2014). Argue with me: Developing thinking and writing through dialog. Bronxville, NY: Wessex Press.
- Sofer-Vital, S., Schwarz, B. B., & (2012). Achievement goals, argumentation and conceptual change in science. Paper presented at the 8th International Conference on Conceptual Change. University of Trier, Germany.
- Walton, D. (2006). Fundamentals of critical argumentation: Critical reasoning and argumentation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- 10.1348/000709908×380772 · DOI
- 10.2307/749877 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
van Leeuwen, A., & Janssen, J. (2019) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2019.02.001 · Cited by 355
“Collaborative learning (CL) refers to instructional arrangements that involve two or more students working together on a shared learning goal (Asterhan & Schwarz, 2016; Dillenbourg, 1999; Gillies & Boyle, 2008).”
BackgroundJanssen, J. J. H. M., & Kirschner, P. A. (2020) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/s11423-019-09729-5 · Cited by 218
An empirical analysis of knowledge co-construction in YouTube comments
Dubovi, I., & Tabak, I. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103939 · Cited by 181
Isohätälä, J., Näykki, P., Järvelä, S., & Baker, M. J. (2017) · Learning Culture and Social Interaction · doi:10.1016/j.lcsi.2017.09.003 · Cited by 143
Coding classroom dialogue: Methodological considerations for researchers
Hennessy, S., Howe, C. J., Mercer, N., & Vrikki, M. (2020) · Learning Culture and Social Interaction · doi:10.1016/j.lcsi.2020.100404 · Cited by 154
Metadata
- Authors
- Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B.
- Affiliations
- Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
- Corresponding author
- Asterhan, Christa S. C.
- Venue
- Educational Psychologist
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2016-04-02
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 164-187
- ISSN
- 0046-1520 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-6985
- OpenAlex
- W2314714283
- Cited by
- 338
- References
- 255
- Citations by year
- 2026: 43 · 2025: 47 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 5
- FWCI
- 46.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Educational Psychologist (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
- Keywords
- argumentation, dialogue, learning outcomes, research framework, research gaps
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
