Project "The role of coherence in the evaluation of competing scientific explanations" (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft)
Background
Conflicting scientific evidence occurs when competing scientific explanations of a scientifically relevant phenomenon exist. Therefore, the ability to comprehend scientific explanations, to mindfully relate them to each other, and to evaluate their relationship is an important prerequisite for understanding the conflicting status of scientific explanations. The aim of the project is to study how laypersons evaluate competing scientific explanations presented in the internet. In the first phase of the project, three experiments explore the relationship between different principles of explanatory coherence and internet-specific characteristics when evaluating explanations. Experiment 1 examines the influence of the causality of scientific explanations on explanation evaluation as a function of the semantic interconnectedness of the information constituting the scientific explanations. Experiment 2 examines the influence of the simplicity of scientific explanations on explanation evaluation as a function of the expertise of the authors having created the scientific explanations. Experiment 3 examines the influence of breadth of scientific explanations on explanation evaluation as a function of the fallacies evoked by false information contained in the scientific explanations. The experiments aim to shed light on the psychological reality of using principles of explanatory coherence as a basis for evaluating competing scientific explanations in the internet. In particular, it will be examined whether principles of explanatory coherence operate differently as a strategy for explanation evaluation when internet-specific characteristics are to be considered as competing information in the evaluation process.
Conference Contributions
Stadtler, M. & Wittwer, J. (2013). Comprehending and evaluating expository texts with contradictions. Accepted symposium at the 15th Biennial Conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction 2013, Munich, Germany.
Wittwer, J. & Ihme, N. (2013). Effects of presentation order and text structure in processing inconsistent explanations. Talk to be held at the 15th Biennial Conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction 2013, Munich, Germany.
Wahl, N. & Wittwer, J. (2012). Der Einfluss semantischer und kausaler Verbundenheit auf das Verstehen und Bewerten wissenschaftlicher Erklärungen. Vortrag in der Arbeitsgruppe „Informelles Lernen im Internet: Die kognitive Verarbeitung wissenschaftsbezogener Texte durch Laien“ auf dem 48. Kongress der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Psychologie, Bielefeld, Deutschland.
Wittwer, J., & Wahl, N. (2012). The role of causality for the plausibility of scientific explanations. Vortrag im Rahmen des Workshops "Comprehension and Validation“ des DFG-Schwerpunktprogramms 1409 „Wissenschaft und Öffentlichkeit: Das Verständnis fragiler und konfligierender Evidenz“, Kassel, Deutschland.
Wittwer, J. (2011). Evaluating and comprehending conflicting information on scientific issues. Symposium at the 14th Biennial Conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Wahl, N., & Wittwer, J. (2011). The role of plausibility and coherence in evaluating competing explanations on scientific issues. Talk held in the symposium “Evaluating and comprehending conflicting information on scientific issues“ at the 14th Biennial Conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Wittwer, J., & Wahl, N. (2011). The role of plausibility and coherence in evaluating competing explanations on the internet. Talk held in the symposium “Science and the public” at the General Online Research 11, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Wahl, N., & Wittwer, J. (2010). The plausibility and the distribution of scientific information on the internet: Effects on explanation evaluation. Poster at the Conference of JURE (Junior Researchers of EARLI), Frankfurt, Germany.
Wahl, N. & Wittwer, J. (2010). Wie bewerten Laien wissenschaftsbezogene Erklärungen im Internet, wenn sie unplausible und unvollständige Informationen enthalten? Vortrag in der Arbeitsgruppe „Wissenschaft und Öffentlichkeit: Das Verständnis fragiler und konfligierender Evidenz – Teil 1“ auf dem 47. Kongress der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Psychologie, Bremen, Deutschland.
Click here for more information.