The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Development of Argument Skills
Abstract
This work sought to obtain experimental evidence to corroborate cross-sectional patterns of development in argument skills and to evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention designed to foster development of these skills in academically at-risk 13- to 14-year-olds. Students participated in 16 sessions of a collaborative, goal-based activity providing dense exercise of argumentive thinking. One condition included peer dialogues; another did not. The former was the more effective, although both groups progressed. Participants showed increased frequency of usage of powerful argumentive discourse strategies, such as counterargument, and decreased frequency of less effective strategies. Quality of individual arguments (for or against a claim) also improved, supporting the existence of a close relation between these two kinds of argument skills.
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
“University students who utilized ChatGPT to practice argumentation skills demonstrated significant improvements in constructing clear, well-supported arguments compared to a control group (Kuhn & Udell, 2003).”
From Investigating the Use of chatGPT as a Tool for Enhancing Critical Thinking and Argumentation Skills in International Relations Debates among Undergraduate Students (2024) · cites this paper as Kuhn & Udell, 2003
In the citing paper
“Moreover, the use of LLMs to provide immediate, targeted feedback on the strengths and weaknesses of students' arguments has been found to significantly improve their ability to construct clear, wellsupported arguments (Kuhn & Udell, 2003).”
From Investigating the Use of chatGPT as a Tool for Enhancing Critical Thinking and Argumentation Skills in International Relations Debates among Undergraduate Students (2024) · cites this paper as Kuhn & Udell, 2003
In the citing paper
“Moreover, the significant improvements in students' argumentation skills observed in this study align with the findings of Kuhn and Udell (2003) and Kuhn and Crowell (2011), who emphasized the effectiveness of interactive and targeted approaches, such as LLM-based training programs, in honing argumentation skills.”
From Investigating the Use of chatGPT as a Tool for Enhancing Critical Thinking and Argumentation Skills in International Relations Debates among Undergraduate Students (2024) · cites this paper as Kuhn and Udell (2003)
In the citing paper
“Drawing on the work of Kuhn and Udell (2003), who emphasized the importance of dialogic approaches in developing argumentation skills, this research suggests that interaction with AI acts as a valuable dialogic partner.”
From Investigating the Use of chatGPT as a Tool for Enhancing Critical Thinking and Argumentation Skills in International Relations Debates among Undergraduate Students (2024) · cites this paper as Kuhn and Udell (2003)
In the citing paper
“Argument skills increase between childhood and adolescence (Kuhn & Udell, 2003).”
From Teaching argumentative synthesis writing through deliberative dialogues: instructional practices in secondary education (2021) · cites this paper as Kuhn & Udell, 2003
Citations
Cites
Advances in Instructional Psychology
(2019) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315864341 · Cited by 2,538
Arguing and Thinking: A Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology
Billig, M. S. (1987) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,146
The concept of activity in Soviet psychology
Kozulin, A. (2002) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203434185-9 · Cited by 2,114
Kuhn, D. (1991) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511571350 · Cited by 2,094
Self-citationPersonal epistemology the psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing
Hofer, B. K. (2009) · Cited by 1,652
Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2001) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.10008 · Cited by 1,434
Education and mind in the knowledge age
(2002) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.40-2294 · Cited by 1,266
Who Is Rational?: Studies of individual Differences in Reasoning
Stanovich, K. E. (1999) · Cited by 1,114
Stanovich, K. E. (1999) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410603432 · Cited by 956
Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory
van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Johnson, R. H., Plantin, C., & Willard, C. A. (2013) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203811306 · Cited by 807
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Anderson, 1998, Literacy for all, 170
- Haith, 1998, Handbook of child psychology: Vol II. Cognition, perception, and language, 199
- Kuhn, 2001, Mechanisms of cognitive development: Neural and behavioral perspectives, 221
- Kuhn, Education for thinking
- Voss, 2001, Argumentation in psychology [Special issue]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Science Education International
International Council of Associations for Science Education (2019) · Science education international · doi:10.33828/sei · Cited by 1,071
Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises
Nickerson, R. S. (1998) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175 · Cited by 7,267
Making sense of argumentation and explanation
Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2008) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.20286 · Cited by 780
Argumentation in Science Education: An Overview
Jiménez‐Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2007) · Science & technology education library · doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_1 · Cited by 612
McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1502_1 · Cited by 798
Sampson, V. D., & Clark, D. B. (2008) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.20276 · Cited by 552
Teaching and learning science as argument
Kuhn, D. (2010) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.20395 · Cited by 571
Self-citationBerland, L. K., & McNeill, K. L. (2010) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.20402 · Cited by 516
Argumentation for Learning: Well-Trodden Paths and Unexplored Territories
Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2016) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2016.1155458 · Cited by 338
Teaching and Learning Argumentative Reading and Writing: A Review of Research
Newell, G. E., Beach, R. W., Smith, J., & VanDerHeide, J. (2011) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.1598/rrq.46.3.4 · Cited by 340
Noroozi, O., Weinberger, A., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M. (2012) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2011.11.006 · Cited by 310
Student thought and classroom language: examining the mechanisms of change in dialogic teaching
Reznitskaya, A., & Gregory, M. (2013) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2013.775898 · Cited by 289
Cognitive Strategies Instruction: From Basic Research to Classroom Instruction
Pressley, M. G., & Harris, K. R. (2009) · Journal of Education · doi:10.1177/0022057409189001-206 · Cited by 298
Promoting Argument-Counterargument Integration in Students' Writing
Nussbaum, E. M., & Schraw, G. (2007) · The Journal of Experimental Education · doi:10.3200/jexe.76.1.59-92 · Cited by 279
Collaborative discourse, argumentation, and learning: Preface and literature review
Nussbaum, E. M. (2008) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.06.001 · Cited by 303
Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. D. (2007) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.20216 · Cited by 269
Andriessen, J. E. B. (2005) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511816833.027 · Cited by 261
The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation
Sampson, V. D., & Clark, D. B. (2008) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.20306 · Cited by 278
Exploring young students' collaborative argumentation within a socioscientific issue
Evagorou, M., & Osborne, J. F. (2013) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.21076 · Cited by 244
Rapanta, C., Garcia-Mila, M., & Gilabert, S. (2013) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654313487606 · Cited by 228
Zhu, M., Liu, O. L., & Lee, H.-S. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103668 · Cited by 229
Kuhn, D., Zillmer, N., Crowell, A., & Zavala, J. (2013) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1080/07370008.2013.830618 · Cited by 247
Self-citationImprovements to elementary children's epistemic understanding from sustained argumentation
Ryu, S., & Sandoval, W. A. (2012) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.21006 · Cited by 294
Representing Student Argumentation as Functionally Emergent From Scientific Activity
Manz, E. (2014) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654314558490 · Cited by 236
What is Scientific Thinking and How Does It Develop?
Kuhn, D. (2002) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470996652.ch17 · Cited by 225
Self-citationMasón, L., & Scirica, F. (2006) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.09.007 · Cited by 233
Beyond control of variables: What needs to develop to achieve skilled scientific thinking?
Kuhn, D., Iordanou, K., Dreibelbis, M. A. P., & Wirkala, C. (2008) · Cognitive Development · doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2008.09.006 · Cited by 224
Self-citationCollaborative reasoning: a dialogic approach to group discussions
Reznitskaya, A., Kuo, L., Clark, A., Miller, B., Jadallah, M., Anderson, R. C., & Nguyen‐Jahiel, K. (2009) · Cambridge Journal of Education · doi:10.1080/03057640802701952 · Cited by 275
Nussbaum, E. M. (2011) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2011.558816 · Cited by 222
McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. S. (2009) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1080/10508400903013488 · Cited by 199
What Needs to Develop in the Development of Inquiry Skills?
Kuhn, D., & Dreibelbis, M. A. P. (2008) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1080/07370000802391745 · Cited by 198
Self-citationCoordinating own and other perspectives in argument
Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2006) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546780600625447 · Cited by 204
Self-citationWilkinson, I. A. G., Reznitskaya, A., Reninger, K. B., Oyler, J., Glina, M. B., Drewry, R., Kim, M., & Nelson, K. (2016) · Language and Education · doi:10.1080/09500782.2016.1230129 · Cited by 226
Janssen, J., Kirschner, F., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., & Paas, F. (2010) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-010-9131-x · Cited by 180
Developing Dialogic Argumentation Skills: A 3-year Intervention Study
Crowell, A., & Kuhn, D. (2014) · Journal of Cognition and Development · doi:10.1080/15248372.2012.725187 · Cited by 179
Self-citationBritt, M. A., Richter, T., & Rouet, J. (2014) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2014.916217 · Cited by 179
What goes well with physics? Measuring and altering the image of science
Kessels, U., Rau, M., & Hannover, B. (2006) · British Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1348/000709905x59961 · Cited by 184
Personal epistemology: Theory, research, and future directions.
Hofer, B. K., & Bendixen, L. D. (2011) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/13273-009 · Cited by 185
The Effect of Argumentative Task Goal on the Quality of Argumentative Discourse
García-Milà, M., Gilabert, S., Erduran, S., & Felton, M. K. (2013) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.21057 · Cited by 181
Greene, J. A., & Yu, S. B. (2015) · Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1177/2372732215622223 · Cited by 160
The Second Decade: What Develops (and How)
Kuhn, D., & Franklin, S. (2007) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0222 · Cited by 160
Self-citationAnalytic Frameworks for Assessing Dialogic Argumentation in Online Learning Environments
Clark, D. B., Sampson, V. D., Weinberger, A., & Erkens, G. (2007) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-007-9050-7 · Cited by 158
What is Scientific Thinking and How Does it Develop?
Kuhn, D. (2010) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781444325485.ch19 · Cited by 155
Self-citationCivic Education: What Schools Can Do to Encourage Civic Identity and Action
Youniss, J. (2011) · Applied Developmental Science · doi:10.1080/10888691.2011.560814 · Cited by 152
COGNITIVE MODELS OF WRITING: WRITING PROFICIENCY AS A COMPLEX INTEGRATED SKILL
Deane, P., Odendahl, N., Quinlan, T., Fowles, M. E., Welsh, C., & Bivens‐Tatum, J. (2008) · ETS Research Report Series · doi:10.1002/j.2333-8504.2008.tb02141.x · Cited by 183
A meta-analytic review of the relationship between epistemic cognition and academic achievement.
Greene, J. A., Cartiff, B. M., & Duke, R. F. (2018) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/edu0000263 · Cited by 150
Walker, J. P., Sampson, V. D., & Zimmerman, C. O. (2011) · Journal of Chemical Education · doi:10.1021/ed100622h · Cited by 136
Facilitating family group inquiry at science museum exhibits
Gutwill, J. P., & Allen, S. (2009) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.20387 · Cited by 134
Effects of dialogic learning on value-loaded critical thinking
Frijters, S., Dam, G. T. M. T., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2007) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.11.001 · Cited by 142
Lin, S., & Mintzes, J. J. (2010) · International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education · doi:10.1007/s10763-010-9215-6 · Cited by 150
Rainbow: A framework for analysing computer-mediated pedagogical debates
Baker, M. J., Andriessen, J. E. B., Lund, K., van Amelsvoort, M., & Quignard, M. (2007) · International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning · doi:10.1007/s11412-007-9022-4 · Cited by 137
The locus of the myside bias in written argumentation
Wolfe, C. R., & Britt, M. A. (2008) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546780701527674 · Cited by 128
Barzilai, S., & Zohar, A. (2014) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2013.863265 · Cited by 169
Sampson, V. D., & Clark, D. B. (2009) · Research in Science Education · doi:10.1007/s11165-009-9146-9 · Cited by 124
Kuhn, D., Goh, W., Iordanou, K., & Shaenfield, D. E. (2008) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01190.x · Cited by 123
Self-citationImproving Students' Evaluation of Informal Arguments
Larson, A. A., Britt, M. A., & Kurby, C. A. (2009) · The Journal of Experimental Education · doi:10.3200/jexe.77.4.339-366 · Cited by 118
Munneke, L., Andriessen, J. E. B., Kanselaar, G., & Kirschner, P. A. (2006) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2006.10.003 · Cited by 117
Understanding Clicker Discussions: Student Reasoning and the Impact of Instructional Cues
Knight, J., Wise, S. B., & Southard, K. M. (2013) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.13-05-0090 · Cited by 112
The development of possibility judgment within and across domains
Shtulman, A. (2009) · Cognitive Development · doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2008.12.006 · Cited by 109
Science education for students with special needs
Villanueva, M. G., Taylor, J., Therrien, W. J., & Hand, B. M. (2012) · Studies in Science Education · doi:10.1080/14703297.2012.737117 · Cited by 103
Examining transfer effects from dialogic discussions to new tasks and contexts
Reznitskaya, A., Glina, M. B., Carolan, B. V., Michaud, O., Rogers, J. G., & Sequeira, L. (2012) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.02.003 · Cited by 111
Becker, N. M., Rasmussen, C. L., Sweeney, G., Wawro, M., Towns, M. H., & Cole, R. S. (2012) · Chemistry Education Research and Practice · doi:10.1039/c2rp20085f · Cited by 100
Kuhn, D. (2009) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470479193.adlpsy001007 · Cited by 102
Self-citationVisualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning
Janssen, J. J. H. M., Erkens, G., & Kanselaar, G. (2006) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2006.10.005 · Cited by 98
Cognitive Foundations of Learning Argumentation
García-Milà, M., & Andersen, C. (2007) · Science & technology education library · doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_2 · Cited by 99
Developing pre-service teachers' evidence-based argumentation skills on socio-scientific issues
Iordanou, K., & Constantinou, C. P. (2014) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.07.004 · Cited by 97
Explicit argumentation instruction to facilitate conceptual understanding and argumentation skills
Çetin, P. S. (2013) · Research in Science & Technological Education · doi:10.1080/02635143.2013.850071 · Cited by 115
Investigating Instruction for Improving Revision of Argumentative Essays
Butler, J. A., & Britt, M. A. (2011) · Written Communication · doi:10.1177/0741088310387891 · Cited by 92
Elementary children's judgments of the epistemic status of sources of justification
Sandoval, W. A., & Çam, A. (2010) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.20426 · Cited by 96
Cooperative Learning in Industrial-sized Biology Classes
Armstrong, N. A., Chang, S., & Brickman, M. (2007) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.06-11-0200 · Cited by 93
Why Argue? Developing Understanding of the Purposes and Values of Argumentive Discourse
Kuhn, D., Wang, Y., & Li, H. (2010) · Discourse Processes · doi:10.1080/01638531003653344 · Cited by 96
Self-citationConservation and conversation types: Forms of recognition and cognitive development
Psaltis, C., & Duveen, G. (2007) · British Journal of Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1348/026151005x91415 · Cited by 87
Tawfik, A. A., Law, V., Ge, X., Xing, W., & Kim, K. (2018) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.01.035 · Cited by 86
Argumentation in Science Education: A Model-based Framework
Böttcher, F., & Meisert, A. (2010) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/s11191-010-9304-5 · Cited by 86
Critical integrative argumentation: Toward complexity in students’ thinking
Nussbaum, E. M. (2020) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2020.1845173 · Cited by 103
Learning to Argue Through Dialogue: a Review of Instructional Approaches
Rapanta, C., & Felton, M. K. (2021) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-021-09637-2 · Cited by 120
Assessment of uncertainty‐infused scientific argumentation
Lee, H., Liu, O. L., Pallant, A., Roohr, K. C., Pryputniewicz, S., & Bracey, Z. B. (2014) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.21147 · Cited by 85
Developing Argument Skills Across Scientific and Social Domains
Iordanou, K. (2010) · Journal of Cognition and Development · doi:10.1080/15248372.2010.485335 · Cited by 86
Weinstock, M. P., Neuman, Y., & Glassner, A. (2006) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.89.2.327 · Cited by 80
The Role of Epistemic Cognition in Adolescent Identity Formation: Further Evidence
Krettenauer, T. (2005) · Journal of Youth and Adolescence · doi:10.1007/s10964-005-4300-9 · Cited by 76
Asterhan, C. S. C., Schwarz, B. B., & Gil, J. (2011) · British Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.2011.02030.x · Cited by 80
Social perspective taking: a benefit of bilingualism in academic writing
HSIN, L. B., & Snow, C. E. (2017) · Reading and Writing · doi:10.1007/s11145-016-9718-9 · Cited by 77
Argumentation as core curriculum
Kuhn, D., & Moore, W. (2015) · Learning Research and Practice · doi:10.1080/23735082.2015.994254 · Cited by 84
Self-citation“Argue With Me”: A Method for Developing Argument Skills
Iordanou, K., & Rapanta, C. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.631203 · Cited by 96
Processes of Sibling Influence in Adolescence: Individual and Family Correlates*
Whiteman, S. D., & Christiansen, A. T. (2008) · Family Relations · doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2007.00480.x · Cited by 71
Effects of representational guidance during computer-supported collaborative learning
Janssen, J. J. H. M., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kanselaar, G. (2008) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9078-1 · Cited by 70
Ross, H. S., Ross, M., Stein, N. L., & Trabasso, T. (2006) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00970.x · Cited by 70
Reasoning during joint decision-making by preschool peers
Köymen, B., Rosenbaum, L., & Tomasello, M. (2014) · Cognitive Development · doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2014.09.001 · Cited by 70
Malaysian Students' Scientific Argumentation: Do groups perform better than individuals?
Heng, L. L., Surif, J., & Seng, C. H. (2015) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500693.2014.995147 · Cited by 68
Epistemic similarities between students' scientific and supernatural beliefs.
Shtulman, A. (2012) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0030282 · Cited by 71
Grooms, J. A., Sampson, V. D., & Enderle, P. J. (2018) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.21451 · Cited by 79
The effects of in-class debates on argumentation skills in second language education
el Majidi, A., Janssen, D., & de Graaff, R. (2021) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2021.102576 · Cited by 102
Deane, P., & Yi, S. (2014) · Psicologí a Educativa · doi:10.1016/j.pse.2014.10.001 · Cited by 82
The pedagogy of argumentation in science education: science teachers’ instructional practices
Yılmaz, Y. Ö., Çakıroğlu, J., Ertepınar, H., & Erduran, S. (2017) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500693.2017.1336807 · Cited by 66
Investigating the impact of automated feedback on students’ scientific argumentation
Zhu, M., Lee, H., Wang, T., Liu, O. L., Belur, V. K., & Pallant, A. (2017) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500693.2017.1347303 · Cited by 69
Hefter, M. H., Berthold, K., Renkl, A., Riess, W., Schmid, S., & Fries, S. (2014) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-014-9320-y · Cited by 63
Documenting the Development of Modelling Competencies of Grade 7 Mathematics Students
Biccard, P., & Wessels, D. C. J. (2011) · International perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematical modelling · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0910-2_37 · Cited by 63
Creating a Program to Deepen Family Inquiry at Interactive Science Exhibits
Allen, S., & Gutwill, J. P. (2009) · Curator The Museum Journal · doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2009.tb00352.x · Cited by 67
The Early Ontogeny of Reason Giving
Köymen, B., & Tomasello, M. (2020) · Child Development Perspectives · doi:10.1111/cdep.12384 · Cited by 62
Tawfik, A. A., & Jonassen, D. H. (2013) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/s11423-013-9294-5 · Cited by 61
Metadata
- Authors
- Kuhn, D., & Udell, W.
- Affiliations
- Columbia University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kuhn, Deanna
- Venue
- Child Development
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-09-12
- Volume
- 74
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1245-1260
- ISSN
- 0009-3920 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-8624
- OpenAlex
- W2078619954
- Cited by
- 595
- References
- 59
- Citations by year
- 2026: 19 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 47 · 2019: 42 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 27
- FWCI
- 14.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Child Development (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
- Social Sciences › Education › Education and Critical Thinking Development
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- argumentative reasoning, counterargument, peer discussion, cooperative learning, at-risk students, adolescents, argument quality
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Black or African American, Child, Communication, Conflict, Psychological, Female, Hispanic or Latino, Humans, Male, New York City, Peer Group, Poverty, Problem Solving, Remedial Teaching, Risk Factors, Thinking, Underachievement, Urban Population, Verbal Behavior, Black People
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
