Grasping Psychological Evidence: Integrating Evidentiary Practices in Psychology Instruction

References

• Amsel, E., Ashley, A., Baird, T., & Johnston, A. (2014). Conceptual change in psychology students’ acceptance of the scientific foundation of the discipline. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 13(3), 232–242. https://doi.org/10.2304/plat.2014.13.3.232
   Google Scholar
• Balloo, K., Pauli, R., & Worrell, M. (2018). Conceptions of research methods learning among psychology undergraduates: AQ methodology study. Cognition and Instruction, 36(4), 279–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2018.1494180
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barzilai, S., & Chinn, C. A. (2018). On the goals of epistemic education: Promoting apt epistemic performance. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 27(3), 353–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2017.1392968
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barzilai, S., & Chinn, C. A. (2020). A review of educational responses to the “post-truth” condition: Four lenses on “post-truth” problems. Educational Psychologist, 55(3), 107–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1786388
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhattacherjee, A. (2012). Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices (2nd ed.). Createspace.
   Google Scholar
• Braasch, J. L. G., & Bråten, I. (2017). The discrepancy-induced source comprehension (D-ISC) model: Basic assumptions and preliminary evidence. Educational Psychologist, 52(3), 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1323219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewer, C. L., Hopkins, J. R., Kimble, G. A., Matlin, M. W., McCann, L. I., McNeil, O. V. … Saundra, (1993). Curriculum. In T. V. McGovern (Ed.), Handbook for enhancing undergraduate education in psychology (pp. 161–182). American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Britt, M. A., Rouet, J.-F., Blaum, D., & Millis, K. (2019). A reasoned approach to dealing with fake news. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6(1), 94–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732218814855
   Google Scholar
• Bromme, R., & Goldman, S. R. (2014). The public’s bounded understanding of science. Educational Psychologist, 49(2), 59–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.921572
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bromme, R., Kienhues, D., & Porsch, T. (2010). Who knows what and who can we believe? Epistemological beliefs are beliefs about knowledge (mostly) attained from others. In L. D. Bendixen & F. C. Feucht (Eds.), Personal epistemology in the classroom: Theory, research, and implications for practice (pp. 163–193). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chinn, C. A., Duncan, R. G., & Rinehart, R. W. (2018). Epistemic design: Design to promote transferable epistemic growth in the PRACCIS project. In E. Manalo, Y. Uesaka, & C. A. Chinn (Eds.), Promoting spontaneous use of learning and reasoning strategies: Theory, research, and practice for effective transfer. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Chinn, C. A., Rinehart, R. W., & Buckland, L. A. (2014). Epistemic cognition and evaluating information: Applying the AIR model of epistemic cognition. In D. Rapp & J. Braasch (Eds.), Processing inaccurate information (pp. 425–454). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chinn, C. A., & Rinehart, R. W. (2016). Epistemic cognition and philosophy: Developing a new framework for epistemic cognition. In J. A. Greene, W. A. Sandoval, & I. Bråten (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 460–478). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Chinn, C. A., & Sandoval, W. (2018). Epistemic cognition and epistemic development. In F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman & P. Reimann (Eds.), International handbook of the learning sciences. (pp. 24–33). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Credé, M., Tynan, M. C., & Harms, P. D. (2017). Much ado about grit: a meta-analytic synthesis of the grit literature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(3), 492–511. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000102
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. P. (2011). Mixed methods research. SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, H. (2007). Rejecting the Ideal of value-free science. In H. Kincaid, J. Dupré, & A. Wylie (Eds.), Value-free science: Ideals and illusions? (pp. 120–141). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, H. (2009). Science, policy, and the value-free ideal. University of Pittsburgh Press.
   Google Scholar
• Duhigg, C. (2012). The power of habit: Why we do what we do in life and business. Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Duncan, R. G., Chinn, C. A., & Barzilai, S. (2018). Grasp of evidence: Problematizing and expanding the next generation science standards’ conceptualization of evidence. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(7), 907–937. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21468
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Einfeld, C. (2019). Nudge and evidence based policy: fertile ground. Evidence & Policy, 15(4), 509–524. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426418X15314036559759
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elmes, D. G., Kantowitz, B. H., & Roediger, I. I. I., H. L. (2011). Research methods in psychology. Cengage Learning.
   Google Scholar
• Epstein, D. (2019). Range: Why generalists triumph in a specialized world. Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Estes, D., Chandler, M., Horvath, K. J., & Backus, D. W. (2003). American and British college students’ epistemological beliefs about research on psychological and biological development. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 23(6), 625–642. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0193-3973(03)00002-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feinstein, N. (2011). Salvaging science literacy. Science Education, 95(1), 168–185. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20414
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feinstein, N. W., & Waddington, D. I. (2020). Individual truth judgments or purposeful, collective sensemaking? Rethinking science education’s response to the post-truth era. Educational Psychologist, 55(3), 155–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1780130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford, M. (2008). Grasp of practice’ as a reasoning resource for inquiry and nature of science understanding. Science & Education, 17(2-3), 147–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-006-9045-7
   Google Scholar
• Gladwell, M. (2006). The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference. Little, Brown.
   Google Scholar
• Goldman, A. I. (2001). Experts: Which ones should you trust? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 63(1), 85–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2001.tb00093.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gurung, R. A., & Hackathorn, J. (2018). Ramp it up: A call for more research in introductory. Teaching of Psychology, 45(4), 302–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628318796413
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gurung, R. A., Hackathorn, J., Enns, C., Frantz, S., Cacioppo, J. T., Loop, T., & Freeman, J. E. (2016). Strengthening introductory psychology: A new model for teaching the introductory course. The American Psychologist, 71(2), 112–124. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0040012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Güss, C. D., & Bishop, T. (2019). On the (Ir) relevance of psychological research: Students versus scientists and implications for teaching. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 9(1), 59. https://doi.org/10.5539/jedp.v9n1p59
   Google Scholar
• Hughes, S., Lyddy, F., & Lambe, S. (2013). Misconceptions about psychological science: A review. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 12(1), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.2304/plat.2013.12.1.20
   Google Scholar
• Hogan, K., & Maglienti, M. (2001). Comparing the epistemological underpinnings of students’ and scientists’ reasoning about conclusions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 663–687. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.1025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes, J. D., & Beins, B. C. (2009). Psychology is a science: At least some students think so. Teaching of Psychology, 36(1), 5–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280802529350
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahne, J., & Bowyer, B. (2017). Educating for democracy in a partisan age: Confronting the challenges of motivated reasoning and misinformation. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1), 3–34. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216679817
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keren, A. (2018). The public understanding of what? Laypersons’ epistemic needs, the division of cognitive labor, and the demarcation of science. Philosophy of Science, 85(5), 781–792. https://doi.org/10.1086/699690
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kienhues, D., Jucks, R., & Bromme, R. (2020). Sealing the gateways for post-truthism: Reestablishing the epistemic authority of science. Educational Psychologist, 55(3), 144–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1784012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. (2010). Teaching and learning science as argument. Science Education, 94(5), 810–824. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20395
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D., Iordanou, K., Pease, M., & Wirkala, C. (2008). Beyond control of variables: What needs to develop to achieve skilled scientific thinking? Cognitive Development, 23(4), 435–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2008.09.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LaCosse, J., Ainsworth, S. E., Shepherd, M. A., Ent, M., Klein, K. M., Holland-Carter, L. A., Moss, J. H., Licht, M., & Licht, B. (2017). An active-learning approach to fostering understanding of research methods in large classes. Teaching of Psychology, 44(2), 117–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628317692614
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leung, J. S. C. (2020). Promoting students’ use of epistemic understanding in the evaluation of socioscientific issues through a practice-based approach. Instructional Science, 48(5), 591–622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09522-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longino, H. (1990). Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Longino, H. (2019). The social dimensions of scientific knowledge. In E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/scientific-knowledge-social/
   Google Scholar
• Lyddy, F., & Hughes, S. (2012). Attitudes towards psychology as a science and the persistence of psychological misconceptions in psychology undergraduates. In Karandashev, V. & McCarthy, S. (Eds.), Teaching psychology around the world (Vol. 3). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Maxwell, S. E., Lau, M. Y., & Howard, G. S. (2015). Is psychology suffering from a replication crisis? What does “failure to replicate” really mean? The American Psychologist, 70(6), 487–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039400
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCrudden, M. T., & Sparks, P. C. (2014). Exploring the effect of task instructions on topic beliefs and topic belief justifications: A mixed methods study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2013.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCrudden, M. T., Stenseth, T., Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2016). The effects of topic familiarity, author expertise, and content relevance on Norwegian students’ document selection: A mixed methods study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(2), 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNeill, K. L., & Berland, L. (2017). What is (or should be) scientific evidence use in K-12 classrooms? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(5), 672–689. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21381
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miralda-Banda, A., Garcia-Mila, M., & Felton, M. (2021). Concept of evidence and the quality of evidence-based reasoning in elementary students. Topoi, 40(2), 359–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-019-09685-y
   Google Scholar
• Nasir, N. I. S., Lee, C. D., Pea, R., & McKinney de Royston, M. (2021). Rethinking learning: What the interdisciplinary science tells us. Educational Researcher, 50(8), 557–565. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X211047251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, J., Pimentel, D., Alberts, B., Allchin, D., Barzilai, S., Bergstrom, C., Coffey, J., Donovan, B., Kivinen, K., Kozyreva, A., & Wineburg, S. (2022). Science education in the age of misinformation. Standford University.
   Google Scholar
• Payne, D. G., & Westermann, D. L. (2003). Research methods in cognition. In S. F. Davis (ed.), Handbook of research methods in experimental psychology (pp. 365–388). Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Peterson, D. (2015). Putting measurement first: Understanding ‘grit’ in educational policy and practice. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 49(4), 571–589. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.12128
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Philip, T. M., Bang, M., & Jackson, K. (2018). Articulating the “how,” the “for what,” the “for whom,” and the “with whom” in concert: A call to broaden the benchmarks of our scholarship. Cognition and Instruction, 36(2), 83–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2018.1413530
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Philip, T. M., & Sengupta, P. (2021). Theories of learning as theories of society: A contrapuntal approach to expanding disciplinary authenticity in computing. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 30(2), 330–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2020.1828089
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reiss, J., & Sprenger, J. (2020). Scientific Objectivity. In E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy., <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2020/entries/scientific-objectivity/>.
   Google Scholar
• Rinehart, R. W., Duncan, R. G., Chinn, C. A., Atkins, T. A., & DiBenedetti, J. (2016). Critical design decisions for successful model-based inquiry in science classrooms. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 7(2), 17–40. https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v7i2.20137
   Google Scholar
• Ryu, S., & Sandoval, W. A. (2015). The influence of group dynamics on collaborative scientific argumentation. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(2), 335–351. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1338a
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samarapungavan, A. (2019). Construing scientific evidence: The role of disciplinary knowledge in reasoning with and about evidence in scientific practice. In K. Engelmann, F. Fischer, J. Osborne, & C. A. Chinn (Eds.), Scientific reasoning and argumentation: The roles of domain‐specific and domain‐general knowledge. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Scharrer, L., Rupieper, Y., Stadtler, M., & Bromme, R. (2017). When science becomes too easy: Science popularization inclines laypeople to underrate their dependence on experts. Public Understanding of Science (Bristol, England), 26(8), 1003–1018. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516680311
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shrout, P. E., & Rodgers, J. L. (2018). Psychology, science, and knowledge construction: Broadening perspectives from the replication crisis. Annual Review of Psychology, 69, 487–510. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011845
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spiegel, A. & Miller, L. (Hosts) (2017, January 9). The secret history of thoughts [Audio podcast episode]. Invisibilia. https://www.npr.org/programs/invisibilia/375927143/the-secret-history-of-thoughts
   Google Scholar
• Stadtler, M., & Bromme, R. (2014). The content-source integration model: A taxonomic description of how readers comprehend conflicting scientific information. In D. N. Rapp & J. L. G. Braasch (Eds.), Processing inaccurate information: Theoretical and applied perspectives from cognitive science and the educational sciences (pp. 379–402). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stevens, C., Witkow, M. R., & Smelt, B. (2016). Strengthening scientific reasoning skills in introductory psychology: Evidence from community college and liberal arts classrooms. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 2(4), 245–260. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000070
   Google Scholar
• Thomm, E., Barzilai, S., & Bromme, R. (2017). Why do experts disagree? The role of conflict topics and epistemic perspectives in conflict explanations. Learning and Instruction, 52, 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.03.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomm, E., Gold, B., Betsch, T., & Bauer, J. (2021). When preservice teachers’ prior beliefs contradict evidence from educational research. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 1055–1072. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12407
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaidis, D. C., & Bran, A. (2019). Respectable challenges to respectable theory: cognitive dissonance theory requires conceptualization clarification and operational tools. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1189. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01189
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vazire, S., Schiavone, S. R., & Bottesini, J. G. (2022). Credibility beyond replicability: Improving the four validities in psychological science. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 31(2), 162–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214211067779
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wineburg, S., & McGrew, S. (2019). Lateral reading and the nature of expertise: Reading less and learning more when evaluating digital information. Teachers College Record, 121(11), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811912101102
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wineburg, S., Breakstone, J., McGrew, S., Smith, M. D., & Ortega, T. (2022). Lateral reading on the open Internet: A district-wide field study in high school government classes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(5), 893–909. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000740
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yarkoni, T. (2020). The generalizability crisis. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 45, e1. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X20001685
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar