Scientific controversies and epistemological sensitization - Effects of an intervention on psychology students’ epistemological beliefs and argumentation skills

Abstract

The present study investigates the effects of an intervention presenting resolvable, scientific controversies and an epistemological sensitization measure on the changes in psychology students’ epistemological beliefs. Drawing on the notion that the presentation of resolvable scientific controversies induces epistemological doubt and the notion that inducing epistemological doubt is eased in the presence of an epistemological sensitization, we used an epistemological beliefs intervention consisting of five resolvable controversies that was applied in a sample consisting of psychology students. We hypothesized that the intervention will reduce absolutist and multiplicist epistemological beliefs will at the same increasing evaluatist beliefs. We also assumed that the epistemological sensitization would enhance the effect of the intervention. For a domain-specific questionnaire, the results indicated a reduction of absolutist epistemological beliefs regardless of the presence of the epistemological sensitization. Unexpectedly, there was backfire indicated by a rise of multiplicist beliefs. For a domain- and topic-specific questionnaire there was no significant reduction of absolutist and multiplicist beliefs but a significant increase in evaluatist beliefs when the epistemological sensitization was present. Finally, a measure assessing argumentation skills revealed an increase in argumentation skills only when the epistemological sensitization is present. Implications and limitations will be discussed.