The Role of Contextual Epistemic Beliefs in a Multiple Source Use Task

Schoute, Eric C.

Conference Object

The Role of Contextual Epistemic Beliefs in a Multiple Source Use Task

Author(s) / Creator(s)

Schoute, Eric C.

Abstract / Description

Much remains to be uncovered about students’ a priori stance toward engaging with a complex, multiple source use task. The present study uncovered that students often selected topics that they were already familiar with, and that their relational reasoning ability was positively predictive of subsequent demonstrated critical-analytic thinking on an argumentative essay. Further, although meaningfully distinct contextual epistemic beliefs profiles were uncovered, those were not predictive of performance. Yet, beliefs about knowledge and justification are suggested to be greatly important to students’ knowledge construction and justification behaviors, and the non-significance was surprising. Future studies and planned analyses as part of the current study will further explore the relation between contextual epistemic beliefs and decision making exhibited during an MSU task.

Persistent Identifier

https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.16226

Date of first publication

2025-04-22

Is part of

2025 Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association

Publisher

PsychArchives

Citation

Select Style

Download BibTex

Download as Text

AERA 2025 Contextual Epistemic Beliefs • Schoute.pdf

Adobe PDF - 1.86MB

MD5: 0e26c4ead348f9f5675bcec8aa9f0753

Sharing Level 0+ (Public Use) CC-BY-SA 4.0

Download

Description: AERA 2025 Presentation • Contextual Epistemic Beliefs

Rationale for choice of sharing level: We want our contribution to be available to the scholarly community but also to those outside of this community. We are interested to learn to what end you want to consult this contribution (e.g., personal or professional interest, or scholarly reading).

Is related to

Preprint
Exploring Students’ Perceptions of the Epistemic Demands of Complex Issues and Exhibited Critical-Analytic Thinking in an In-Class Multiple Source Use Project

Schoute, Eric C. & Alexander, Patricia A., 2025-04-23, PsychArchives

The overarching goal of the present study was to explore relations between students’ perceptions regarding the epistemic demands of complex issues, and their exhibited critical-analytic thinking in the context of an ecologically-valid MSU study. Students’ flexibility in perceptions of varyingly complex issues was indicative of their epistemic competence, or their awareness of situated epistemic demands. To unearth these perceptions, we created the novel Perceptions of Epistemic Demands (PED) Task. K-means cluster analysis using students’ responses returned six theoretically defensible profiles that were hypothesized to differentially predict students’ critical-analytic thinking exhibited in argumentative essays. However, no significant differences were found. To explore possible reasons for this finding, students’ essay topic selection was linked to their perception of that topic on the PED Task. That analysis indicated that students chose a claim that they perceived as most self-relevant, familiar, and controversial. Students’ guided reflections corroborated those reasons but also revealed that most opted for an issue that they thought was easy to find sources for and defend in the essay. Most students also explained that they had assumed a position regarding the issue they chose prior to text access, with only a few students voicing the goal to remain open to persuasion by sources. Taken together, this suggested that students largely operated under (non-)epistemic goals that did not prioritize knowledge generation or belief formation but rather focused on task completion. Students’ task goals likely clouded the relation between their espoused perceptions and demonstrated critical-analytic thinking. Consequently, in future research and education, we call to focus expressly on epistemic education, practice with sourcing and MSU, and teaching the mechanisms and importance of quality argumentation writing in higher education contexts to promote critical-analytic thinking.

There are no other versions of this object.

Author(s) / Creator(s)

Schoute, Eric C.
PsychArchives acquisition timestamp

2025-04-23T11:09:08Z
Made available on

2025-04-23T11:09:08Z
Date of first publication

2025-04-22
Abstract / Description

Much remains to be uncovered about students’ a priori stance toward engaging with a complex, multiple source use task. The present study uncovered that students often selected topics that they were already familiar with, and that their relational reasoning ability was positively predictive of subsequent demonstrated critical-analytic thinking on an argumentative essay. Further, although meaningfully distinct contextual epistemic beliefs profiles were uncovered, those were not predictive of performance. Yet, beliefs about knowledge and justification are suggested to be greatly important to students’ knowledge construction and justification behaviors, and the non-significance was surprising. Future studies and planned analyses as part of the current study will further explore the relation between contextual epistemic beliefs and decision making exhibited during an MSU task.

en
Publication status

other
Review status

peerReviewed
Persistent Identifier

https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12034/11638
Persistent Identifier

https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.16226
Language of content

eng
Publisher

PsychArchives
Is part of

2025 Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association
Is related to

https://www.psycharchives.org/handle/20.500.12034/11639
Dewey Decimal Classification number(s)

150
Title

The Role of Contextual Epistemic Beliefs in a Multiple Source Use Task

en
DRO type

conferenceObject