Differences in epistemic justification profiles during conflicting socio-scientific information processing: A study of visual and memory-based behavior via eye-tracking
How individuals process and understand controversial scientific issues with social implications has been linked to their beliefs about epistemic justification, which concern how knowledge claims can be justified. In this study, we used cluster analysis to classify undergraduate and graduate students...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2025-02-01
|
| Series: | Acta Psychologica |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001691824005584 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1841545584711827456 |
|---|---|
| author | Meng-Jung Tsai Ching-Yeh Wang An-Hsuan Wu Ivar Bråten |
| author_facet | Meng-Jung Tsai Ching-Yeh Wang An-Hsuan Wu Ivar Bråten |
| author_sort | Meng-Jung Tsai |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | How individuals process and understand controversial scientific issues with social implications has been linked to their beliefs about epistemic justification, which concern how knowledge claims can be justified. In this study, we used cluster analysis to classify undergraduate and graduate students (n = 46) based on their beliefs about epistemic justification and eye tracking to investigate how profiles of epistemic justification differed when processing and representing information about a particular socio-scientific issue. It was found that one cluster predominantly relied on justification by multiple sources, whereas two other clusters combined reliance on justification by multiple sources with either reliance on personal justification or justification by authority. When these three clusters were compared while reading conflicting information about a controversial socio-scientific issue, multiple heat-map analysis and lag sequential analysis of eye movement data indicated that participants who predominantly relied on justification by multiple sources displayed a more balanced and integrative processing pattern than participants in the two other groups. Further, the cluster characterized by strong, unique beliefs in justification by multiple sources represented conflicting information in a more balanced way in written accounts of the issue. This study provides new insights into the role of beliefs about epistemic justification when learners encounter conflicting information about a controversial socio-scientific issue that have both theoretical and educational implications. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-60c2e0cb55ee49158649447341a7bc52 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 0001-6918 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-02-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Acta Psychologica |
| spelling | doaj-art-60c2e0cb55ee49158649447341a7bc522025-01-12T05:24:01ZengElsevierActa Psychologica0001-69182025-02-01252104680Differences in epistemic justification profiles during conflicting socio-scientific information processing: A study of visual and memory-based behavior via eye-trackingMeng-Jung Tsai0Ching-Yeh Wang1An-Hsuan Wu2Ivar Bråten3National Taiwan Normal University, TaiwanNational Kaohsiung University of Hospitality, TaiwanNational Taiwan Normal University, TaiwanUniversity of Oslo, Norway; Corresponding author at: Department of Education, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1092 Blindern, NO-0317 Oslo, Norway.How individuals process and understand controversial scientific issues with social implications has been linked to their beliefs about epistemic justification, which concern how knowledge claims can be justified. In this study, we used cluster analysis to classify undergraduate and graduate students (n = 46) based on their beliefs about epistemic justification and eye tracking to investigate how profiles of epistemic justification differed when processing and representing information about a particular socio-scientific issue. It was found that one cluster predominantly relied on justification by multiple sources, whereas two other clusters combined reliance on justification by multiple sources with either reliance on personal justification or justification by authority. When these three clusters were compared while reading conflicting information about a controversial socio-scientific issue, multiple heat-map analysis and lag sequential analysis of eye movement data indicated that participants who predominantly relied on justification by multiple sources displayed a more balanced and integrative processing pattern than participants in the two other groups. Further, the cluster characterized by strong, unique beliefs in justification by multiple sources represented conflicting information in a more balanced way in written accounts of the issue. This study provides new insights into the role of beliefs about epistemic justification when learners encounter conflicting information about a controversial socio-scientific issue that have both theoretical and educational implications.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001691824005584Epistemic beliefsEpistemic justificationReading conflicting informationSocio-scientific issuesCluster analysisEye tracking |
| spellingShingle | Meng-Jung Tsai Ching-Yeh Wang An-Hsuan Wu Ivar Bråten Differences in epistemic justification profiles during conflicting socio-scientific information processing: A study of visual and memory-based behavior via eye-tracking Acta Psychologica Epistemic beliefs Epistemic justification Reading conflicting information Socio-scientific issues Cluster analysis Eye tracking |
| title | Differences in epistemic justification profiles during conflicting socio-scientific information processing: A study of visual and memory-based behavior via eye-tracking |
| title_full | Differences in epistemic justification profiles during conflicting socio-scientific information processing: A study of visual and memory-based behavior via eye-tracking |
| title_fullStr | Differences in epistemic justification profiles during conflicting socio-scientific information processing: A study of visual and memory-based behavior via eye-tracking |
| title_full_unstemmed | Differences in epistemic justification profiles during conflicting socio-scientific information processing: A study of visual and memory-based behavior via eye-tracking |
| title_short | Differences in epistemic justification profiles during conflicting socio-scientific information processing: A study of visual and memory-based behavior via eye-tracking |
| title_sort | differences in epistemic justification profiles during conflicting socio scientific information processing a study of visual and memory based behavior via eye tracking |
| topic | Epistemic beliefs Epistemic justification Reading conflicting information Socio-scientific issues Cluster analysis Eye tracking |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001691824005584 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mengjungtsai differencesinepistemicjustificationprofilesduringconflictingsocioscientificinformationprocessingastudyofvisualandmemorybasedbehaviorviaeyetracking AT chingyehwang differencesinepistemicjustificationprofilesduringconflictingsocioscientificinformationprocessingastudyofvisualandmemorybasedbehaviorviaeyetracking AT anhsuanwu differencesinepistemicjustificationprofilesduringconflictingsocioscientificinformationprocessingastudyofvisualandmemorybasedbehaviorviaeyetracking AT ivarbraten differencesinepistemicjustificationprofilesduringconflictingsocioscientificinformationprocessingastudyofvisualandmemorybasedbehaviorviaeyetracking |