Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Conceptual Analysis of Perspective Taking in Support of Socioscientific Reasoning

  • Article
  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Perspective taking is a critical yet tangled construct that is used to describe a range of psychological processes and that is applied interchangeably with related constructs. The resulting ambiguity is particularly vexing in science education, where although perspective taking is recognized as critical to informed citizens’ ability to negotiate scientifically related societal issues, or socioscientific issues (SSI) via socioscientific reasoning (SSR), the precise nature of perspective taking remains elusive. To operationalize perspective taking, a theoretical conceptual analysis was employed and used to position perspective taking within the context of SSR. The resulting, more precise construct identified as socioscientific perspective taking (SSPT) requires engagement with others or their circumstances, an etic/emic shift in one’s viewpoint, and a moral context guided by conscience.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We use the term “perspective taking” as a noun and “perspective-taking” (hyphenated) as a compound adjective to modify terms such as “tasks” and “behaviors.” We follow this convention in order to avoid confusion that might ensue from joining “taking” with the noun that it modifies. We follow this convention with “role taking” as well.

  2. The terms “etic” and “emic” are used to describe social science research conducted from an outsider’s (“etic”) or insider’s (“emic”) vantage point. The terms were coined by Pike (1967) from the words “phonetic” and “phonemic” and align with the linguistic traditions of these latter terms.

References

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2006). Socioscientific issues in pre-college science classrooms. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning and discourse on socioscientific issues in science education (pp. 41–61). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aikenhead, G., & Ogawa, M. (2007). Indigenous knowledge and science revisited. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 2(3), 539–620.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arendt, A. (1958). The human condition (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Attenborough, R. (1982). Gandhi. [motion picture]. Los Angeles: Columbia Pictures.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind. Boston: MIT Press/Bradford Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind”? Cognition, 21(1), 37–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrow, R. (1990). The role of conceptual analysis in curriculum inquiry: a holistic approach. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 5(3), 269–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batson, C. D. (1991). The altruism question: toward a social-psychological answer. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Bealer, G. (1998). Intuition and the autonomy of philosophy. In M. DePaul & W. Ramsey (Eds.), Rethinking intuition: The psychology of intuition and its role in philosophical inquiry (pp. 201–239). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkowitz, M. W. (1997). The complete moral person: anatomy and formation. In J. M. DuBois (Ed.), Moral issues in psychology: personalist contributions to selected problems (pp. 11–42). Lanham: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, H. H., & Marshall, C. R. (1981). Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In A. K. Joshi, B. L. Webber, & I. A. Sag (Eds.), Elements of discourse understanding (pp. 10–63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coombs, J. R., & Daniels, L. B. (1991). Philosophical inquiry: conceptual analysis. In E. C. Short (Ed.), Forms of curriculum inquiry (pp. 27–42). Albany: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corcoran, K., & Mallinckrodt, B. (2000). Adult attachment, self-efficacy, perspective-taking, and conflict resolution. Journal of Counseling & Development, 78, 473–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denes-Raj, V., & Epstein, S. (1994). Conflict between intuitive and rational processing: when people behave against their better judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(5), 819.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K. (2017). The research act: a theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. DC Heath: Lexington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, M. (1970). Natural symbols: explorations in cosmology. London: Barrie & Rockliff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duveen, J., & Solomon, J. (1994). The great evolution trial: Use of role-play in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(5), 575–582.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ennis, R. (1991). Critical thinking: a streamlined conception. Teaching Philosophy, 14(1), 5–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88, 915–933.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, C., & Pollack, S. (1982). Tootsie. [motion picture]. Los Angeles: Columbia Pictures.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenigstein, A., & Abrams, D. (1993). Self-attention and the egocentric assumption of shared perspectives. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 287–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H. (1968). The development of role-taking and communication skills in children. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flinders, D. J., Noddings, N., & Thornton, S. J. (1986). The null curriculum: Its theoretical basis and practical implications. Curriculum Inquiry, 16(1), 33–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, S. J. (2001). Historical empathy in theory and practice: some final thoughts. In O. L. Davis, E. A. Yeager, & S. J. Foster (Eds.), Historical empathy and perspective taking in the social studies. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, S. R., Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2009). Moral sensitivity in the context of socioscientific issues in high school science students. International Journal of Science Teacher Education, 31(2), 279–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franks, D. D. (2013). Why we need neurosociology as well as social neuroscience: Or—why role-taking and theory of mind are different concepts. In D. D. Franks & J. H. Turner (Eds.), Handbook of neurosociology, handbooks of sociology and social research (pp. 27–32). Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media B.V.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furberg, A., & Ludvigsen, S. (2008). Students’ meaning-making of socio-scientific issues in computer mediated settings: exploring learning through interaction trajectories. International Journal of Science Education, 30(13), 1775–1799.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, J. C. (2003). Moral development and reality: beyond the theories of Kohlberg and Hoffman. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goetzman, G., & Demme, J. (1991). The silence of the lambs. [motion picture]. Los Angeles: Orion Pictures.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, T. F. (1964). A topology of the teaching concept. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 3(4), 284–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, T. F. (1971). The activities of teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, T.F. (1975). Perspectives on thinking about change. Report for Exploration Fund of the Kettering Foundation.

  • Green, T. F. (1999). Voices: The educational formation of conscience. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. A., Sandoval, W. A., & Braten, I. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of epistemic cognition. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grove, R., & Short, E. C. (1991). Theoretical inquiry: components and structure. Forms of Curriculum Inquiry, 211–224.

  • Guber, P., & Levinson, B. (1988). Rain man [motion picture]. Los Angeles: MGM/UA Distribution Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3), 381–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutstein, S. E., & Whitney, T. (2002). Asperger syndrome and the development of social competence. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 17(3), 161–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: why good people are divided by politics and religion. New York: Pantheon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, S. (2010). The moral landscape: how science can determine human values. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, M. L. (2000). Empathy and moral development: implications for caring and justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollan, D., & Throop, C. J. (2008). Whatever happened to empathy?: introduction. Ethos, 36(4), 385–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iñárritu, A. G. (2009). The Three Amigos of Cha Cha Cha. The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/26/movies/26roht.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.

  • Jackson, F. (1998). From metaphysics to ethics: A defense of conceptual analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, B. (1984). The Bill James baseball abstract. New York: Ballantine Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2007). Argumentation in science education: an overview. In S. Erduran & Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 3–28). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahan, D. (2012). Cultural cognition as a conception of the cultural theory of risk. In R. Hillerbrand, P. Sandin, S. Roeser, & M. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of risk theory: epistemology, decision theory, ethics and social implications of risk (pp. 725–760). London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, S., & Zeidler, D. L. (2017). A case for the use of conceptual analysis in science education research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(4), 538–551.

    Google Scholar 

  • Killen, M., & Smetana, J. (2006). Handbook of moral development. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (2004). Reflective judgment: theory and research on the development of epistemic assumptions through adulthood. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 5–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohlberg, L. (1968). Early education: a cognitive developmental approach. Child Development, 39, 1013–1062.

    Google Scholar 

  • Komisar, B. P. (1968). Teaching: Act and enterprise. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 6(2), 168–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kornblith, H. (2002). Knowledge and its place in nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krathwohl, D. R. (1993). Methods of educational and social science research: an integrated approach. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krauss, R. M., & Fussell, S. R. (1996). Social psychological models of interpersonal communication. In E. T. Higgins & A. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: handbook of basic principles (pp. 655–701). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: the construction of scientific facts (2nd ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazenby, H. (2016). What is equality of opportunity in education? Theory and Research in Education, 14(1), 65–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, P., & Ashby, R. (2001). Empathy, perspective taking, and rational understanding. In O. L. Davis Jr., E. A. Yeager, & S. J. Foster (Eds.), Historical empathy and perspective taking in the social studies (pp. 21–50). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H., Chang, H., Choi, K., Kim, S. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2012). Developing character and values for global citizens: analysis of pre-service science teachers’ moral reasoning on socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34(6), 925–953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H., Yoo, J., Choi, K., Kim, S., Krajcik, J., Herman, B., & Zeidler, D. L. (2013). Socioscientific issues as a vehicle for promoting character and values for global citizens. International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 2079–2113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J., Sokol, B. W., & Elfers, T. (2008). Taking and coordinating perspectives: from prereflective interactivity, through reflective intersubjectivity, to metareflective sociality. Human Development, 51(5–6), 294–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGinnis, J. R. (2003). The morality of inclusive verses exclusive settings. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 195–216). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melville, W., Yaxley, B., & Wallace, J. (2007). Virtues, teacher professional expertise, and socioscientific issues. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 12, 95–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minshew, N. J., & Keller, T. A. (2010). The nature of brain dysfunction in autism: functional brain imaging studies. Current Opinion in Neurology, 23(2), 124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monash, P., & De Palma, B. (1976). Carrie. [Motion Picture]. Los Angeles: United Artists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monroe, S. M., & Harkness, K. L. (2011). Recurrence in major depression: a conceptual analysis. Psychological Review, 118(4), 655.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). (2016). NSTA Position Statement: Teaching Science in the Context of Societal and Personal Issues.

  • Neumann, R., Parry, S., & Becher, T. (2002). Teaching and learning in their disciplinary contexts: A conceptual analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 27(4), 405–417.

    Google Scholar 

  • Next Generation Science Standards Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsen, E. S., & Fecica, A. M. (2011). A model of communicative perspective-taking for typical and atypical populations of children. Developmental Review, 31(1), 55–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nucci, L. (2001). Education in the moral domain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pakula, A. J., & Mulligan, R. (1962). To kill a mockingbird.[motion picture]. Universal City: Universal Studios.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papineau, D. (1993). Philosophical naturalism. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1926). The language and thought of the child. New York: Harcourt Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pike, K. L. (1967). Etic and emic standpoints for the description of behavior. In K. L. Pike (Ed.), Language in relation to a unified theory of the structure of human behavior (pp. 37–72). The Hague: Mouton & Co..

    Google Scholar 

  • Premack, D., & Woodruff, G. (1978). Does the chimpanzee have a ‘theory of mind’? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4, 515–526.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raz, J. (1990). Practical reason and norms. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/Science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729–280). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, D. A. (2011). Competing visions of scientific literacy: the influence of a science curriculum policy image. In C. Linder, L. Ostman, D. A. Roberts, P. Wickman, G. Erickson, & A. MacKinnon (Eds.), Promoting scientific literacy: science education research in transaction (pp. 11–27). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, D. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Scientific literacy, science literacy, and science education. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education (Vol. II, pp. 545–558). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R. R. (2001). Reflection in higher education: A concept analysis. Innovative Higher Education, 26(1), 37–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. (2004). Moral sensitivity and its contribution to the resolution of socio-scientific issues. Journal of Moral Education, 33(3), 339–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D., & Donnelly, L. A. (2006). Socioscientific argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1463–1488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2003). Scientific errors, atrocities and blunders. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning and discourse on socioscientific issues in science education (pp. 261–285). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Research in Science Education, 37, 371–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D., Klosterman, M. L., & Topcu, M. S. (2011). Learning science content and socio scientific reasoning through classroom explorations of global climate change. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific issues in the classroom (pp. 45–77). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selman, R. L. (1971a). The relation of role taking to the development of moral judgment in children. Child Development, 42, 79–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selman, R. L. (1971b). Taking another’s perspective: role-taking development in early childhood. Child Development, 42(6), 1721–1734.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selman, R. L. (1977). A structural-developmental model of social cognition: implications for intervention research. The Counseling Psychologist, 6(4), 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaafsma, S. M., Pfaff, D. W., Spunt, R. P., & Adolphs, R. (2015). Deconstructing and reconstructing theory of mind. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(2), 65–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheffler, I. (1960). The language of education. Springfield: Thomas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sider, T. (2001). Criteria of personal identity and the limits of conceptual analysis. Noûs, 35, 189–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonneaux, L. (2008). Argumentation in socio-scientific contexts. Argumentation in Science Education. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 179–199). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, B. (1960). A concept of teaching. The Teachers College Record, 61(5), 229–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J., & Ross, H. (2007). Training parents to mediate sibling disputes affects children's negotiations and conflict understanding. Child Development, 78(3), 790–805.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sobel, D. (1999). Galileo's daughter: A historical memoir of science, faith, and love. New York: Walker & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soltis, J. F. (1978). An introduction to the analysis of educational concepts (2nd ed.). Boston: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verducci, S. (2000). A moral method? Thoughts on cultivating empathy through method acting. Journal of Moral Education, 29(1), 87–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vilardaga, R. (2009). A relational frame theory account of empathy. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 5(2), 178–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, L. J. (1980). Cognitive and perspective-taking prerequisites for moral development. Child Development, 51, 131–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, M., & Rogers, W. (2018). A new approach to defining disease. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 43(4), 402–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. (1963). Thinking with concepts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittek, L., & Kvernbekk, T. (2011). On the problems of asking for a definition of quality in education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 55(6), 671–684.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2007). High school students’ informal reasoning on a socio-scientific issue: qualitative and quantitative analyses. International Journal of Science Education, 29(9), 1163–1187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis: theory, research, and practice. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. II, pp. 697–726). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., & Kahn, S. (2014). It’s debatable: using socioscientific issues to develop scientific literacy, K-12. Arlington: NSTA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., & Keefer, M. (2003). The role of moral reasoning and the status of socio-scientific issues in science education. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socio- scientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 7–38). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2008). The role of moral reasoning in argumentation: conscience, character and care. In S. Erduran & M. Pilar Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 201–216). Dordrecht: Springer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, D. L. (2011). An inclusive view of scientific literacy: core issues and future directions of socioscientific reasoning. In C. Linder, L. Ostman, D. A. Roberts, P. Wickman, G. Erickson, A. MacKinnon, & A. (Eds.), Promoting scientific literacy: Science education research in transaction (pp. 176–192). Routledge / Taylor & Francis Group: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: a research-based framework for socio-scientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., Berkowitz, M. W., & Bennett, K. (2013). Thinking (scientifically) responsibly: the cultivation of character in a global science education community. In M. P. Mueller et al. (Eds.), Assessing schools for generation R (responsibility), contemporary trends and issues in science education 41 (pp. 83–99). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Teacher Education, Ohio University, McCracken Hall 309Z, Athens, OH, 45701, USA

    Sami Kahn

  2. Department of Teaching and Learning, University of South Florida, EDU 105, Tampa, FL, 33620, USA

    Dana L. Zeidler

Authors
  1. Sami Kahn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dana L. Zeidler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sami Kahn.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kahn, S., Zeidler, D.L. A Conceptual Analysis of Perspective Taking in Support of Socioscientific Reasoning. Sci & Educ 28, 605–638 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00044-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00044-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation