Participants' engagement (think-aloud word counts) did not differ significantly between texts or assessment points¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Word counts on the think-aloud protocols did not differ significantly between the own-side and other-side texts, between assessment points, or in their interaction. → Iordanou 2025

Evidence¶

Iordanou 2025¶

Iordanou, K., Fotiou, C., Manoli, A., & Zembylas, M. (2025). Examining myside bias on a controversial historical event after engagement in dialogic argumentation: Insights from a think aloud study. Learning and Instruction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102209

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Linear mixed-effects models on think-aloud protocol word counts (own-side M = 351, SD = 140.89; other-side M = 341, SD = 139.22) from 30 participants at pre and 24 at post, with random intercepts for participants and school. No significant text, time, or interaction effects; equivalence was not tested.

"Participants’ engagement did not differ significantly between the two texts (“own” vs “other”) (β = 9.08, SE = 18.09, t = -.50, p =.62), and between the two assessment points (β = 16.07, SE = 18.81, t = -.85, p = .40). No significant interaction was found between the texts and assessment points (β = 16.24, SE = 36.17, t = -.45, p = .65)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Cognitive processing differs by text type: participants engaged in more epistemic processing, meta-comprehension, and coherence-based processing when reading the other-side text than the own-side text — related
• Students made more evaluative comments after the dialogic argumentation intervention, but their evaluations still favored their own position — related