The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Influence of Oral Discussion on Written Argument
Abstract
This article examines the effects of participation in oral argumentation on the development of individual reasoning as expressed in persuasive essays. Engagement in oral argumentation is the essential feature of a classroom discussion method called collaborative reasoning. A premise of this method is that reasoning is fundamentally dialogical and, hence, the development of reasoning is best nurtured in supportive dialogical settings such as group discussion. Students from 3 classrooms participated in collaborative reasoning discussions for a period of 5 weeks. Then, these students and students from 3 comparable classrooms who had not engaged in collaborative reasoning wrote persuasive essays. The essays of collaborative reasoning students contained a significantly greater number of relevant arguments, counter-arguments, rebuttals, formal argument devices, and uses of text information.
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
“Changes in oral argumentation skills have been shown to transfer to written performance (Felton et al., 2009;Reznitskaya et al., 2001).”
From Teaching argumentative synthesis writing through deliberative dialogues: instructional practices in secondary education (2021) · cites this paper as Reznitskaya et al., 2001
Citations
Cites
Speech Genres and Other Late Essays
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986) · University of Texas Press eBooks · doi:10.7560/720466 · Cited by 9,079
Cohen, J. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155 · Cited by 8,771
The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays
Wasiolek, E., Bakhtin, M. M., Holquist, M., & Emerson, C. G. (1982) · Comparative Literature · doi:10.2307/1770763 · Cited by 7,540
Pearson, P. D., Barr, (. E., Kamil, M. L., Mosenthal, P. B., & Barr, R. (1991) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.28-5764 · Cited by 6,850
Multiple regression in behavioral research
Kerlinger, F. N., & Pedhazur, E. J. (1973) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 4,919
Classroom Discourse: The Language of Teaching and Learning
Cazden, C. B. (1988) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,045
Eliciting Self‐Explanations Improves Understanding
Michelene, T. H., Leeuw, N. D., Chiu, M., & Lavancher, C. (1994) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1016/0364-0213(94)90016-7 · Cited by 2,492
Kuhn, D. (1991) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511571350 · Cited by 2,094
Cheng, P. W., & Holyoak, K. J. (1985) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(85)90014-3 · Cited by 1,463
A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension
Anderson, R. C., & Pearson, P. D. (1988) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139524513.007 · Cited by 1,207
Self-citationKirsch, I. S., & Improvement (1993) · Cited by 1,062
Research on written composition
Scardamalia, M. (1986) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 493
Effects of Dyadic Interaction on Argumentive Reasoning
Kuhn, D., Shaw, V., & Felton, M. K. (1997) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1503_1 · Cited by 480
Means, M. L., & Voss, J. F. (1996) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1402_1 · Cited by 448
Nickerson, R. S., Perkins, D. N., & Smith, E. E. (2014) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315792538 · Cited by 447
Kuhn, D. (1992) · Harvard Educational Review · doi:10.17763/haer.62.2.9r424r0113t670l1 · Cited by 431
On the natural selection of reasoning theories
Cheng, P. W., & Holyoak, K. J. (1989) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(89)90031-0 · Cited by 362
Patterns of Discourse in Two Kinds of Literature Discussion
Chinn, C. A., Anderson, R. C., & Waggoner, M. A. (2001) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.1598/rrq.36.4.3 · Cited by 355
Self-citationCollaborative Discovery in a Scientific Domain
Okada, T., & Simon, H. (1997) · Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2102_1 · Cited by 350
Problems in Argument Analysis and Evaluation
Govier, T. (1987) · De Gruyter eBooks · doi:10.1515/9783110859249 · Cited by 331
The National Assessment of Educational Progress
Tyler, R. W. (1967) · Art Education · doi:10.2307/3190981 · Cited by 324
Mutual peer tutoring: Effects of structuring tutorial interaction to scaffold peer learning.
King, A., Staffieri, A., & Adelgais, A. (1998) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.90.1.134 · Cited by 309
The Snowball Phenomenon: Spread of Ways of Talking and Ways of Thinking Across Groups of Children
Anderson, R. C., Nguyen‐Jahiel, K., McNurlen, B., Archodidou, A., Kim, S. Y., Reznitskaya, A., Tillmanns, M. D., & Gilbert, L. (2001) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1901_1 · Cited by 271
Self-citationThe role of talk in children's peer collaborations.
Teasley, S. D. (1995) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/0012-1649.31.2.207 · Cited by 248
Anderson, R. C., & Freebody, P. R. (1982) · Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) · Cited by 241
Self-citationSocial Organizational Factors in Learning to Read: The Balance of Rights Hypothesis
Au, K. H., & Mason, J. M. (1981) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.2307/747251 · Cited by 238
Structural Aspects of Constructing Meaning From Text
Goldman, S. R., & Rakestraw, J. A. (2000) · doi:10.4324/9781410605023.ch20 · Cited by 218
The Structure of Discourse in Collaborative Learning
Chinn, C. A., O’Donnell, A. M., & Jinks, T. S. (2000) · The Journal of Experimental Education · doi:10.1080/00220970009600650 · Cited by 217
The Structure of Discussions that Promote Reasoning
Chinn, C. A., & Anderson, R. C. (1998) · Teachers College Record The Voice of Scholarship in Education · doi:10.1177/016146819810000205 · Cited by 166
Self-citationOn the Logical Integrity of Children's Arguments
Anderson, R. C., Chinn, C. A., Chang, J. Y., Waggoner, M. A., & Yi, H. (1997) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1502_1 · Cited by 164
Self-citationStudent Argumentative Writing Knowledge and Ability at Three Grade Levels
McCann, T. M. (1989) · Research in the Teaching of English · doi:10.58680/rte198915528 · Cited by 156
Teaching and Learning the Writing of Persuasive/Argumentative Discourse
Crowhurst, M. (1990) · Canadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation · doi:10.2307/1495109 · Cited by 112
The comparison of oral and written productions in two discourse types∗
Hidi, S. E., & Hildyard, A. (1983) · Discourse Processes · doi:10.1080/01638538309544557 · Cited by 112
Politzer, G., & Nguyen‐Xuan, A. (1992) · The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A · doi:10.1080/14640749208401292 · Cited by 94
Collaborative Reasoning About Stories
Waggoner, M. A., Chinn, C. A., Yi, H., & Anderson, R. C. (1995) · Language Arts · doi:10.58680/la199524495 · Cited by 94
Self-citationComparing teachers’ instruction to promote students’ thinking
Onosko, J. J. (1990) · Journal of Curriculum Studies · doi:10.1080/0022027900220503 · Cited by 45
Promoting Critical Thinking through Dialogical-Thinking Reading Lessons.
Commeyras, M. (1993) · The Reading Teacher · Cited by 38
Pellegrini, A. D., Galda, L., & Rubin, D. L. (1984) · Language & Communication · doi:10.1016/0271-5309(84)90012-0 · Cited by 19
Research Review: Patterns of Development in Writing Persuasive/Argumentative Discourse.
Crowhurst, M. (1988) · Cited by 18
Philosophy for students with learning disabilities
Simon, C. S. (1979) · Thinking The Journal of Philosophy for Children · doi:10.5840/thinking19791149 · Cited by 10
Burnes, B. (1981) · Thinking The Journal of Philosophy for Children · doi:10.5840/thinking19813149 · Cited by 7
Philosophy for Children in Hawaii
Higa, W. R. (1980) · Thinking The Journal of Philosophy for Children · doi:10.5840/thinking19802118 · Cited by 5
Education for Democracy and Freedom.
Lipman, M. (1997) · Cited by 4
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Challenge of Academic Language
Snow, C. E., & Uccelli, P. (2010) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609664.008 · Cited by 692
“However, some complex features might also transfer from spoken to written language, as Collaborative Reasoning studies demonstrate (Reznitskaya et al., 2001).”
BackgroundMercer, N., & Howe, C. J. (2012) · Learning Culture and Social Interaction · doi:10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.03.001 · Cited by 710
“They report positive transfer to the quality of students' written arguments (Reznitskaya et al., 2006).”
BackgroundThe Development of Argument Skills
Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2003) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00605 · Cited by 595
Examining the effects of classroom discussion on students’ comprehension of text: A meta-analysis.
Murphy, P. K., Wilkinson, I. A. G., Soter, A. O., Hennessey, M. N., & Alexander, J. F. (2009) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0015576 · Cited by 566
“Despite differences across the purposes and goals of various approaches, evidence suggests that discussions about and around text have the potential to increase student comprehension, metacognition, critical thinking, and reasoning, as well as students’ ability to state and support arguments (e.g., Bird, 1984; Reznits…”
BackgroundMcNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1502_1 · Cited by 798
“Argument has been a goal across a variety of domains (Voss & Van Dyke, 2001) including language arts (Reznitskaya & Anderson, 2002; Reznitskaya et al., 2001), economics (Cho & Jonassen, 2002), mathematics (Cobb, 2002), debate (D.”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Reznitskaya, A., Anderson, R. C., McNurlen, B., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., Archodidou, A., & Kim, S.-Y.
- ORCID
- Reznitskaya, Alina
- Venue
- Discourse Processes
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2001-11
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 2-3
- Pages
- 155-175
- ISSN
- 0163-853X (ISSN-L)
- 1532-6950
- OpenAlex
- W2062614287
- Cited by
- 271
- References
- 45
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 6.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Discourse Processes (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
- Social Sciences › Education › Linguistics and Education Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- oral argumentation, collaborative reasoning, argumentative writing, argumentation, dialogical reasoning, classroom discussion, counterargument, rebuttal, writing development
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
