Abstract
This study investigates the possibility that solitary dialog, in which individuals construct in writing a hypothetical dialogic argument, may more fully reveal individual skill achievement in argument than do conventional argumentive essays. A sample of 54 11–12-year-old Chinese students individually composed such written dialogs, subsequent to their participation in a 4-month dialog-based argument curriculum that previously reported gains in both dialogic and essay assessments. Also partaking in the constructed dialog task reported on here were two non-intervention control groups from the same school; one the same age (n = 50) as and the other 2 years older (n = 52) than the intervention group. As well as outperforming their agemates, the intervention group’s performance on the constructed dialog task showed they had achieved skill equal to that of the older group in counterargument and were superior to them in using evidence to justify claims. The possibility is considered that the my-side bias reported in typical argumentive essays is due to limited understanding of the purpose of essay writing, rather than lack of skills per se.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ahn, W., Kalish, C., Medin, D., & Gelman, S. (1995). The role of covariation versus mechanism information in causal attribution. Cognition, 54(3), 299–352.
Alexander, R. (2018). Developing dialogic teaching: genesis, process, trial. Research Papers in Education, 33(5), 561–598.
Andriessen, J., Baker, M., & Suthers, D. (2003). Argumentation, computer support, and the educational context of confronting cognition. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 1–25). Berlin: Springer.
Asterhan, C., & Schwarz, B. (2007). The effects of monological and dialogical argumentation on concept learning in evolutionary theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 626–639.
Asterhan, C., & Schwarz, B. (2010). Online moderation of synchronous e-argumentation. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5, 259–282.
Asterhan, C., & Schwarz, B. (2016). Argumentation for learning: Well-trodden paths and unexplored territories. Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 164–187.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). The problem of speech genres. In Speech genres and other late essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Baron, J. (1988). Thinking and deciding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1982). From conversation to composition: the role of instruction in a developmental process. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 2). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1986). Chapter 8: Levels of inquiry into the nature of expertise in writing. Review of Research in Education, 13(1), 259–282.
Berland, L., & McNeill, K. (2010). A learning progression for scientific argumentation: Understanding student work and designing supportive instructional contexts. Science Education, 94(5), 765–793.
Bernardi, B., & Antolini, E. (1996). Structural differences in the production of written arguments. Argumentation, 10(2), 175–196.
Billig, M. (1987). Arguing and thinking. A rethorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brem, S. K., & Rips, L. J. (2000). Explanation and evidence in informal argument. Cognitive Science, 24(4), 573–604.
Byrnes, J., & Dunbar, K. (2014). The nature and development of critical-analytic thinking. Educational Psychology Review, 26(4), 477–493.
Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. (2007). Personally-seeded discussions to scaffold online argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 29(3), 253–277.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. London: Routledge Academic.
Coirier, P., Andriessen, J., & Chanquoy, L. (1999). From planning to translating: The specificity of argumentative writing. In G. Rijlaarsdam & E. Esperet (Series Eds.) & J. Andriessen & P. Coirier (Vol. Eds.), Foundations of argumentative text processing (pp. 1–28). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Coirier, P., & Golder, C. (1993). Writing argumentative text: A developmental study of the acquisition of supporting structures. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 8(2), 169–181.
Crowell, A., & Kuhn, D. (2014). Developing dialogic argumentation skills: A three-year intervention study. Journal of Cognition and Development, 15(2), 363–381.
De La Paz, S., & Graham, S. (2002). Explicitly teaching strategies, skills, and knowledge: Writing instruction in middle school classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 687–698.
Dello-Iacovo, B. (2009). Curriculum reform and ‘Quality Education’ in China: An overview. International Journal of Educational Development, 29(3), 241–249.
Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39–72.
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(6), 915–933.
Felton, M. (2004). The development of discourse strategies in adolescent argumentation. Cognitive Development, 19(1), 35–52.
Felton, M., Crowell, A., & Liu, T. (2015). Arguing to agree: mitigating my-side bias through consensus-seeking dialogue. Written Communication, 32(3), 317–331.
Felton, M., & Kuhn, D. (2001). The development of argumentive discourse skill. Discourse Processes, 32(2–3), 135–153.
Ferretti, R. P., & Graham, S. (2019). Argumentative writing: Theory, assessment, and instruction. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 32(6), 1345–1357.
Ferretti, R. P., & Lewis, W. E. (2019). Knowledge of persuasion and writing goals predict the quality of children’s persuasive writing. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 32(6), 1411–1430.
Ferretti, R. P., MacArthur, C. A., & Dowdy, N. S. (2000). The effects of an elaborated goal on the persuasive writing of students with learning disabilities and their normally achieving peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 694–702.
Golder, C., & Coirier, P. (1994). Argumentative text writing: Developmental trends. Discourse Processes, 18(2), 187–210.
Graham, S. (2006). Strategy instruction and the teaching of writing: A meta-analysis. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 187–207). New York: Guilford Press.
Greenberg, J., & Moll, L. C. (1990). Creating zones of possibilities: Combining social contexts for instruction. In L. C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp. 319–348). Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In D. Davidson & G. Harman (Eds.), The logic of grammar (pp. 64–75). Dickenson: Dickenson.
Han, S. (2013). Confucian states and learning life: Making scholar-officials and social learning a political contestation. Comparative Education, 49(1), 57–71.
Hayes, J. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affecting writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (pp. 1–27). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Hemberger, L., Kuhn, D., Matos, F., & Shi, Y. (2017). A dialogic path to evidence-based argumentive writing. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 26(4), 575–607.
Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). An essay on the construction of formal operational structures. The growth of logical thinking: From childhood to adolescence (A. Parsons & S. Milgram, Trans.). London: Basic Books.
Iordanou, K. (2013). Developing face-to-face argumentation skills: Does arguing on the computer help? Journal of Cognition and Development, 14(2), 292–320.
Iordanou, K., & Constantinou, C. (2015). Supporting use of evidence in argumentation through practice in argumentation and reflection in the context of SOCRATES learning environment. Science Education, 99(2), 282–311.
Iordanou, K., & Kuhn, D. (2020). Contemplating the opposition: Does a personal touch matter? Discourse Processes, 57(4), 343–359.
Iordanou, K., Kuhn, D., Matos, F., Shi, Y., & Hemberger, L. (2019). Learning by Arguing. Learning and Instruction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.05.004.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodríguez, A., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “Doing science”: argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757–792.
Kelly, G. J., Druker, S., & Chen, C. (1998). Students’ reasoning about electricity: Combining performance assessments with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20(7), 849–871.
Knudson, R. (1992). Analysis of argumentative writing at two grade levels. The Journal of Educational Research, 83(3), 169–179.
Knudson, R. (1994). An analysis of persuasive discourse: Learning how to take a stand. Discourse Processes, 18(2), 211–230.
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 16–25.
Kuhn, D. (2001). How do people know? Psychological Science, 12(1), 1–8.
Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for thinking. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Kuhn, D. (2019). Critical thinking as discourse. Human Development, 62, 146–164.
Kuhn, D., & Crowell, A. (2011). Dialogic argumentation as a vehicle for developing young adolescents’ thinking. Psychological Science, 22(4), 545–552.
Kuhn, D., Feliciano, N., & Kostikina, D. (2019). Engaging contemporary issues as practice for citizenship. The Social Studies, 110(5), 207–219.
Kuhn, D., Goh, W., Iordanou, K., & Shaenfield, D. (2008). Arguing on the computer: A microgenetic study of developing argument skills in a computer-supported environment. Child Development, 79(5), 1310–1328.
Kuhn, D., Hemberger, L., & Khait, V. (2016a). Argue with me: Argument as a path to developing students’ thinking and writing (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Kuhn, D., Hemberger, L., & Khait, V. (2016b). Tracing the development of argumentive writing in a discourse-rich context. Written Communication, 33(1), 92–121.
Kuhn, D., & Moore, W. (2015). Argument as core curriculum. Learning: Research and Practice, 1(1), 66–78.
Kuhn, D., & Pearsall, S. (1998). Relations between metastrategic knowledge and strategic performance. Cognitive Development, 13(2), 227–247.
Kuhn, D., & Pearsall, S. (2000). Developmental origins of scientific thinking. Journal of Cognition and Development, 1(1), 113–129.
Kuhn, D., Wang, Y., & Li, H. (2011). Why argue? Developing understanding of the purposes and values of argumentive discourse. Discourse Processes, 48(1), 26–49.
Kuhn, D., Zillmer, N., Crowell, A., & Zavala, J. (2013). Developing norms of argumentation: Metacognitive, epistemological, and social dimensions of developing argumentive competence. Cognition and Instruction, 31(4), 456–496.
Leitão, S. (2003). Evaluating and selecting counterarguments: Studies of children’s rhetorical awareness. Written Communication, 20(3), 269–306.
Macagno, F. (2016). Argument relevance and structure. Assessing and developing students’ uses of evidence. International Journal of Educational Research, 79, 180–194.
Marttunen, M., & Laurinen, L. (2001). Learning of argumentation skills in networked and face-to-face environments. Instructional Science, 29, 127–153.
Mayer, R. E. (2003). Learning and instruction. London: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Mayweg-Paus, E., & Macagno, F. (2016). How dialogic settings influence evidence use in adolescent students. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 30(2–3), 121–132.
Mayweg-Paus, E., Macagno, F., & Kuhn, D. (2015). Developing argumentation strategies in electronic dialogs: Is modeling effective? Discourse Processes, 53(4), 280–297.
McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 22, 276–282.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1934).
Means, M., & Voss, J. (1996). Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels. Cognition and Instruction, 14(2), 139–178.
Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(2), 57–74.
Michaels, S., O’Connor, C., & Resnick, L. (2008). Deliberative discourse idealized and realized: Accountable talk in the classroom and in civic life. Studies in Philosophy of Education, 27(4), 283–297.
Ministry of Education. (2001). 教育部关于印发《基础教育课程改革刚要(试行)》的通知 [Notice of the issuance of ‘Basic Education Curriculum Reform Programme (Trial) by the Ministry of Education]. http://www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2002/content_61386.htm
Moshman, D. (2005). Adolescent psychological development (2nd ed.). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Moshman, D. (2011). Adolescent rationality and development: Cognition, morality, and identity (3rd ed.). East Sussex: Psychology Press.
Moshman, D. (2015). Epistemic cognition and development: The psychology of justification and truth. East Sussex: Psychology Press.
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state standards for English language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_ELA%20Standards.pdf
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Nussbaum, E. M. (2008). Collaborative discourse, argumentation, and learning: Preface and literature review. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(3), 345–359.
Nussbaum, E. M., & Asterhan, C. (2016). The psychology of far transfer from classroom argumentation. In F. Paglieri (Ed.), The psychology of argumentation. Norcross: College Publications.
Nussbaum, E. M., & Kardash, C. M. (2005). The effects of goal instructions and text on the generation of counterarguments during writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 157–169.
Nussbaum, E. M., & Schraw, G. (2007). Promoting argument–counterargument integration in students’ writing. Journal of Experimental Education, 76(1), 59–92.
O’Keefe, D. J. (1999). How to handle opposing arguments in persuasive messages: A meta-analytic review of the effects of one-sided and two-sided messages. In M. E. Roloff (Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 22, pp. 209–249). London: Sage.
O'Keefe, D. J. (2016). Persuasion and social influence. In K. B. Jensen, R. T. Craig, J. Pooley, & E. Rothenbuhler (Eds.), International encyclopedia of communication theory and philosophy. Wiley-Blackwell/International Communication Association.
Papathomas, L., & Kuhn, D. (2017). Learning to argue via apprenticeship. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 159, 129–139.
Pellegrini, A. D., Galda, L., & Rubin, D. (1984). Persuasion as a social-cognitive activity: The effects of age and channel of communication on children’s production of persuasive messages. Language & Communication, 4(4), 285–293.
Perkins, D. N., Farady, M., & Bushey, B. (1991). Everyday reasoning and the roots of intelligence. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins, & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Prain, V., & Hand, B. (2016). Coming to know more through and from writing. Educational Researcher, 45(7), 430–434.
Rapanta, C., Garcia-Mila, M., & Gilabert, S. (2013). What is meant by argumentative competence? An integrative review of methods of analysis and assessment in education. Review of Educational Research, 83(4), 483–520.
Resnick, L. B. (1991). Shared cognition: Thinking as social practice. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 1–20). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Resnick, L. B., Asterhan, C. S. C., & Clarke, S. (Eds.). (2015). Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue. Washington, DC: AERA.
Reznitskaya, A., Anderson, R. C., McNurlen, B., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., Archodidou, A., & Kim, S. (2001). Influence of oral discussion on written argument. Discourse Processes, 32(2–3), 155–175.
Ross, L., Lepper, M. R., & Hubbard, M. (1975). Perseverance in self-perception and social perception: Biased attributional processes in the debriefing paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(5), 880–892.
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2008). The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation. Science Education, 93(3), 448–484.
Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence. Science Education, 89(4), 634–656.
Sandoval, W. A., Enyedy, N., Redman, E., & Xiao, S. (2019). Organising a culture of argumentation in elementary science. International Journal of Science Education, 41(13), 1848–1869.
Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2005). The quality of students’ use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23–55.
Shi, Y. (2019). Enhancing evidence-based argumentation in a Mainland China middle school. Comtemporary Eductional Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101809.
Simon, D., & Holyoak, K. J. (2002). Structural dynamics of cognition: From consistency theories to constraint satisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology, 6(6), 283–294.
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2007). Natural myside bias is independent of cognitive ability. Thinking & Reasoning, 13(3), 225–247.
Stapleton, P. (2001). Assessing critical thinking in the writing of Japanese University students: Insights about assumptions and content familiarity. Written Communication, 18(4), 506–548.
Tan, C. (2015). Education policy borrowing and cultural scripts for teaching in China. Comparative Education, 51(2), 196–211.
Tan, C. (2017). Constructivism and pedagogical reform in China: Issues and challenges. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 15(2), 238–247.
Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2014). Rational thinking and cognitive sophistication: Development, cognitive abilities, and thinking dispositions. Developmental Psychology, 50(4), 1037–1048.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (2003). A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., & Kruiger, T. (1987). Handbook of argumentation theory. Dordrecht: Foris.
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Walton, D. (1989). Dialogue theory for critical thinking. Argumentation, 3(2), 169–184.
Walton, D. N. (1992). Plausible argument in everyday conversation. State University of New York Press.
Walton, D. (2006). Fundamentals of critical argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Walton, D. (2014). Dialog theory for critical argumentation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Walton, D., & Krabbe, E. (1995). Commitment in dialogue. New York: State University of New York Press.
Weinstock, M. P., Neuman, Y., & Glassner, A. (2006). Identification of informal reasoning fallacies as a function of epistemological level, grade level, and cognitive ability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 327–341.
Wertsch, J. V., & Sohmer, R. (1995). Vygotsky on learning and development. Human Development, 38(6), 332–337.
Wolfe, C. (2012). Individual difference in the “myside bias” in reasoning and written argumentation. Written Communication, 29(4), 477–501.
Wolfe, C., & Britt, M. A. (2008). The locus of the myside bias in written argumentation. Thinking & Reasoning, 14(1), 1–27.
Zavala, J., & Kuhn, D. (2017). Solitary discourse is a productive activity. Psychological Science, 28(5), 578–586.
Zhao, W. (2020). Epistemological flashpoint in China’s classroom reform: (How) can a ‘Confucian do-after-me pedagogy’ cultivate critical thinking?. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 52(1), 101–117.
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to Dr. Deanna Kuhn for her feedback on the earlier versions of this manuscript.
Funding
This paper is sponsored by Peak Discipline Construction Project of Education at East China Normal University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Appendix
Chinese Version of the Constructed Dialog Task
李平和王华是你们班的两位旗鼓相当的优秀辩手, 他们现在针对中国是否应当禁止烟草销售这个题目展开了一场辩论。请你设想一下他们的辩论对话,你构建的对话需展示你的最佳水平。以下是关于这个辩题的一些信息。你的对话应该这样开始:
李平: 我方认为中国政府应当禁止烟草销售因为吸烟的危害很大。
王华: 我方不同意, 危害虽大但烟草行业带来的经济利益也很大。
请你继续写他们的对话:
李平:XXXXXX
王华:XXXXXX
。。。。。。。
以下的信息可能对你有用:
-
1.
香烟中的尼古丁会在大脑中产生快速的化学反应, 科学证明这种反应能够缓解焦虑和紧张的情绪。
-
2.
每年中国有约 120 万人因为吸烟而过早死亡, 另外有10万人因为吸入二手烟而死亡。
-
3.
在中国有成千上万的农民靠种植烟叶(香烟的原材料)为生。同时烟草行业每年为国家贡献大量财富, 如 2015 年上缴了1.14万亿的烟草税, 占政府财政总收入的 8%。
-
4.
George Harrison 是美国 Beatles 乐队的一名吉他手, 他长期吸烟, 58岁就死于了肺癌。
-
5.
纽约一位名叫 Helen Reichert 的女性现年 108 岁, 她过去的80年间每天都吸半包烟。
-
6.
每年因吸烟人员导致的医疗成本及生产力流失的损失很高, 在美国高达 960 亿美元, 中国亦是如此。
-
7.
戒烟的成功率很低, 中国控烟局的数据显示中国烟民戒烟成功率仅 14.4%。
