Epistemic beliefs as predictors of epistemic emotions: Extending a theoretical model

Rosman, Tom; Mayer, Anne‐Kathrin

doi:10.1111/bjep.12191

Cited by 8 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We modified Rosman and Mayer's ( 2018 ) resolvable controversies intervention that has been described above to address our research questions. We pursued two aims with this modification: (1) to inspect how the resolvable nature of presented controversies affects epistemic change, and (2) to examine the distinct effects of presenting diverging information (i.e., evoking epistemic doubt) on epistemic change by separating effects of doubt from effects that are possibly related to deeper level processing (i.e., the resolution strategy reflection ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Considering the second aim, that is singling out effects of epistemic doubt, we shortened the original resolvable controversies intervention of Rosman and Mayer ( 2018 ). The original paradigm uses both reading and writing about resolvable controversies.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Absolutism, multiplism and evaluativism scores were computed as mean scores of the respective items for the FREE-GST and FREE-EDPSY, exactly as has been done in prior research (e.g., Rosman and Mayer, 2018 ). After inspecting psychometric properties of these scales, we decided to drop one item of the multiplism scale because reliabilities increased for both the FREE-GST and the FREE-EDPSY if this item was excluded.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, Rosman and Mayer ( 2018 ) used the following procedures for implementing the intervention: First, 18 short abstracts of conflicting studies on gender stereotyping and gender-specific discrimination in schools are presented. A crucial component of the resolvable controversies intervention is that apparent contradictions in these texts can be resolved (or integrated) by identifying the context in which a certain type of discrimination (favoring either boys or girls) occurs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the second part of Rosman and Mayer's ( 2018 ) intervention, subjects proceeded by integrating conflicting findings in a writing task. In the resolution instruction of this writing task (i.e., the most prolific instruction for eliciting epistemic change), subjects were required to complete a scientific essay which illustrates conditions of gender-specific discrimination based on the presented studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Mechanisms of Epistemic Change—Under Which Circumstances Does Diverging Information Support Epistemic Development?

Kerwer

Rosman

2018

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The number of studies on how to foster change toward advanced epistemic beliefs (i.e., beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing) is continuously growing because these beliefs are an important predictor of learning outcomes. In past intervention studies, presenting diverging information (e.g., descriptions of studies yielding contradictory results) reliably led to epistemic change. However, prior research insufficiently examined which aspects of diverging information affect these changes.Aims: We investigated (1) if epistemic change differs depending on the (un)resolvability of contradictory information, (2) to what extent explicitly reflecting on diverging information supports epistemic change and (3) how topic-specific diverging information affects topic–and domain-specific epistemic beliefs. All confirmatory hypotheses were preregistered at OSF. Additionally, several exploratory analyses were conducted.Method: To examine the research questions, we employed a simple randomized pre-post design with four experimental groups. N = 185 psychology students participated in the study. Experimental groups differed in the kind of diverging information included: Students either read (1) information on students applying learning strategies (control), (2) unresolvable, or (3a) resolvable controversial information on gender stereotyping. In the latter condition (3b), an additional group of participants deliberately resolved apparent contradictions in a writing task.Results: Confirmatory latent change analyses revealed no significant group differences in epistemic change (i.e., beliefs in the control group also changed toward advanced epistemic beliefs). Using a different methodological approach, subsequent exploratory analyses nevertheless showed that presenting diverging information on gender stereotypes produced stronger topic-specific epistemic change and change in justification beliefs in the treatment groups in contrast to the control group. However, effects in the treatment groups did not differ significantly depending on the resolvability of presented controversies or for the group which was instructed explicitly to integrate controversial findings.Conclusion: Contrary to our expectations, diverging information seems to foster epistemic change toward advanced beliefs regardless of the resolvability of presented information, while no final conclusion concerning effects of reflection could be drawn. Moreover, our findings indicate that effects of topic-specific interventions are more pronounced on topic-specific measures. However, this relationship may vary depending on the epistemic belief dimension (e.g., justification beliefs) under investigation.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations