Learning and Instruction ( IF 6.636 ) Pub Date : 2020-07-07 , DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101367 Sarit Barzilai , Eva Thomm , Talia Shlomi-Elooz
Learners may increasingly encounter conflicting expert reports. However, little is known about how they deal with this challenge. We examined how learners' familiarity with a controversial historical topic affects their epistemic judgments of conflicting expert claims and sources, the interplay of their claim and source evaluation strategies, and their meta-epistemic understanding of the legitimacy of the disagreement (absolutist, multiplist, and evaluativist perspectives). In two studies, topic familiarity increased agreement with belief-consistent expert claims and the perceived trustworthiness of the expert who presented these claims. Topic familiarity also impacted the coordination of evaluation strategies and led to greater reliance on knowledge-based validation. However, topic familiarity did not affect meta-epistemic understanding of the legitimacy of the controversy. In the second study, reading an explanation about reasons for disagreements between historians resulted in higher evaluativism. Teaching about expert disagreement may be a productive approach for promoting appreciation of the diversity of knowledge.
中文翻译:
处理分歧:主题熟悉度和分歧解释在评估相互矛盾的专家主张和消息来源中的作用
学习者可能会越来越多地遇到相互矛盾的专家报告。但是,对于他们如何应对这一挑战知之甚少。我们研究了学习者对一个有争议的历史话题的熟悉如何影响他们对矛盾的专家主张和来源的认知判断,他们的主张和来源评估策略之间的相互作用以及他们对分歧合法性的元认识论理解(专制主义者,多重选择主义者和评价家的观点)。在两项研究中,主题熟悉度提高了与信念一致的专家主张的一致性,并提高了提出这些主张的专家的感知可信度。对主题的熟悉程度还影响了评估策略的协调,并导致了对基于知识的验证的更大依赖。然而,对话题的熟悉度并没有影响对争论的合法性的元认知认识。在第二项研究中,阅读有关历史学家之间分歧原因的解释导致了更高的评价论。教授专家意见分歧可能是促进对知识多样性的欣赏的一种富有成效的方法。