Портал психологических изданий PsyJournals.ru
Каталог изданий 94Рубрики 51Авторы 8245Ключевые слова 20236 Online-сборники 1 АвторамИздателямRSS RSS

Включен в Web of Science СС (ESCI)

Включен в Scopus



Рейтинг Science Index РИНЦ 2017

15 место — направление «Психология»

1,003 — показатель журнала в рейтинге SCIENCE INDEX

0,854 — двухлетний импакт-фактор


Культурно-историческая психология

Издатель: Московский государственный психолого-педагогический университет

ISSN (печатная версия): 1816-5435

ISSN (online): 2224-8935

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17759/chp

Лицензия: CC BY-NC 4.0

Издается с 2005 года

Периодичность: 4 номера в год

Доступ к электронным архивам: открытый

Аффилирован ISCAR


Еlements of design for studying argumentation: the case of two on-going research lines 792

Колер А., студент, Институт психологии и образования, Университет Ньюшателя, Невшатель, Швейцария, alaric.kohler@unine.ch
Аркидьяконо Ф., Ph.D., профессор института психологии и образования университета г.Ньюшатель, Нюшатель, Швейцария


The aim of this paper is to present some ideas in order to construct designs for studying argumentation. Our specific focus is on learning processes involving peer interactions and adult-children activities. We consider argumentation as a context-bounded activity, at the crossroads of different lines of research, such as the neo-piagetian and neo-vygotskian concerns for the socio-cognitive development of higher psychological processes, and the socio-cultural approach of participative interactions within goal-directed activities. In this paper we offer some elements to implement designs around two on-going research lines in order to pay attention to quasi-experimental and observational studies. Firstly we present the task of liquid conservation assuming that a revisitation of this classical study could offer a possibility to consider the argumentation in children's talk beyond Piaget's logicism. The second line concerns an educational situation designed to observe learning through argumentation in classroom contexts; inspired by a piagetian task for studying physics quantities, a sequence is planned to offer students an educational setting to commit into argumentative interactions.

Рубрика: Эмпирические исследования

Тип: научная статья

Ссылка для цитирования

Фрагмент статьи

What is the role of argumentation in learning processes? How and under which circumstances do peer interactions and adult-children activities promote learning through argumentation?

In this paper, we aim to present some elements of designs within two different research lines aiming at highlighting how argumentation can emerge as a context-bounded activity in learning settings. We propose to pay attention to quasi-experimental and observational studies, starting from different perspectives: the neo-piagetian and neo-vygotskian concerns on learning and argumentation; the main approaches of participative interactions within educational activities; and the recent advances of argumentation theories that underline the need of alternative models to consider the argumentative processes emerging from social interactions. We will present some methodological aspects in the implementation of two on-going research designs: the first one concerns the piagetian test of liquid conservation; the second one proposes classroom activities in physics education.

  1. Arcidiacono F., Perret-Clermont A.N. (2009). Revisiting the piagetian test of conservation of quantities of liquid: argumentation within the adult-child interaction // Cultural-Historical Psychology.3.
  2. Arcidiacono F., Pontecorvo C., Greco Morasso S. (2009) Family conversations: the relevance of context in evaluating argumentation // Studies in Communication Sciences. 9 (2).
  3. Asterhan C. S. C., Schwarz B. B. (2007). The effects of dialogical and monological argumentation on concept learning in evolutionary theory // The Journal of Educational Psychology. 99 (3).
  4. Asterhan C. S. C., Schwarz B. B. (2009). Argumentation and explanation in conceptual change: indications from protocol analyses of peer-to-peer dialog // Cognitive Science, 33.
  5. Baker M. (1996) Argumentation et co-construction des connaissances // Interaction et Cognitions. 1 (2—3).
  6. Baker M. (2002). Argumentative interactions, discursive operations and learning to model in science // P. Brna, M. Baker, K. Stenning, A. Tiberghien (еds.) The role of communication in learning to model. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
  7. Baker M. (2003). Computer-mediated interactions for the co-elaboration of scientific notions // J. Andriessens, M. Baker, D. Suthers (еds.) Arguing to Learn: Confronting Cognitions in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environments. Utrecht: Kluwer.
  8. Blanche-Benveniste C. (1997). Approches de la langue parlee en francais. Paris: Ophrys.
  9. Bruner J. (1996). Frames for thinking: ways of making meaning // D. Olson, N. Torrance (еds.) Modes of thought:exploration in culture and cognition. N. Y.: Cambridge University Press.
  10. Buchs C., Butera F. (2004). Socio-cognitive conflict and the role of student interaction in learning. New Review of Social Psychology. 3 (1—2).
  11. Buty C., Plantin C. (еds.) (2009). Argumenter en classe de sciences. Lyon: INRP.
  12. Cesar M., Perret-Clermont A.-N., Benavente A. (2000). Modalites de travail en dyades et conduites a des taches d'algebre chez des eleves portugais // Revue suisse des sciences de l'education. 3.
  13. Doise W., Mugny G., Perret-Clermont A.N. (1975). Social interaction and the development of cognitive operations // European Journal of Social Psychology, 5.
  14. Doise W., Mugny G., Perret-Clermont A.N. (1976). Social interaction and cognitive development: further evidence // European Journal of Social Psychology. 6.
  15. Driver R., Guesne E., Tiberghien A. (еds.) (1985). Children's ideas in science. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
  16. Driver R., Leach J., Millar R., Scott P. (1996). Young people's images of science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  17. Driver R., Newton P., Osborne J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms // Science Education. 84 (3).
  18. Eemeren van F. H., Grootendorst R. (2004). A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Account. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  19. Felton M., Kuhn D. (2001). The development of argumentative discourse skills // Discourse Processes. 32.
  20. Garduno T. (1997). La genese d'une innovation pedagogique // Dossiers de Psychologie. 51.
  21. Giordan A., Girault Y., Clement P. (Eds.) (1994). Conceptions et connaissances. Bern: Lang.
  22. Grice H. P. (1979). Logique et conversation // Communications. 30 (1).
  23. Hundeide K. (1992). The message structure of some Piagetian experiments // A. H. Wold (еd.) The Dialogical Alternative. Towards a Theory of Language and Mind. Oslo:Scandinavian University Press.
  24. Johsua S., Dupin J.J. (еds.) (1989). Representations et modelisations: le «debat scientifique» dans la classe et l'apprentissage de la physique. Bern: Lang.
  25. Kuhn D., Shaw V., Felton M. (1997). Effects of dyadic interaction on argumentative reasoning // Cognition and Instruction. 15 (3).
  26. Kynigos C. (2007). Half-baked logo microworlds as boundary objects in integrated design // Informatics in Education. 6 (2).
  27. Leitao S. (2000). The potential of argument in knowledge building // Human Development, 43.
  28. Lemeignan G., Weil-Barais A. (еds.) (1993). Construire des concepts en physique: l'enseignement de la mecanique.Paris: Hachette.
  29. Levin I., Druyan S. (1993). When sociocognitive transaction among peers fails: the case of misconceptions in science // Child Development. 64.
  30. Marro Clement P. (1999). Deux enfants, un probleme technique, une solution: analyse interlocutoire de la construction interactive d'un raisonnement. Verbum. 21 (2).
  31. Mugny G., Doise W., Perret-Clermont A.N. (1981). Interpersonal coordinations and sociological differences in the construction of the intellect // G. M. Stephenson, J. M. David (еds.) Progress in Applied Social Psychology. N. Y.: Wiley.
  32. Muller Mirza N., Perret-Clermont A.N. (еds.) (2009). Argumentation and Education. Theoretical Foundations and Practices. N. Y.: Springer.
  33. Muller Mirza N., Tartas V., Perret-Clermont A.N., de Pietro J.F. (2007). Using graphical tools in a phased activity for enhancing dialogical skills: an example with Digalo //Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. 2.
  34. Osborne J., Erduran S., Simon S. (2004). Ideas, Evidence & Argument in Science. L.: King's College London.
  35. Perret-Clermont A.N. (1979). La construction de l'in telligence dans l'interaction sociale. Bern: Lang (Eng. tr. Social interaction and cognitive development in children. L.:Academic Press, 1980).
  36. Perret-Clermont A.N. (2006). Comments on Rigotti and Rocci // Studies in Communication Sciences, 6 (2).
  37. Perret-Clermont A.N., Carugati F., Oates J. (2004). A socio-cognitive perspective on learning and cognitive development // J. Oates, A. Grayson (еds.) Cognitive and language development in children. Oxford: Blackwell.
  38. Perret-Clermont A.N., Mugny G., Doise W. (1976). Une approche psychosociologique du developpement cognitif //Archives de Psychologie. 171.
  39. Perret-Clermont A.N., Nicolet M. (1988). Interagir et connaitre. Enjeux et regulations sociales dans le developpement cognitif. Cousset: Del Val.
  40. Piaget J. (1924). Le jugement et le raisonnement chez l'enfant. Neuchatel: Delachaux et Nietstle .
  41. Piaget J. (1926). La representation du monde chez l'enfant. Paris: PUF.
  42. Piaget J. (1965). Etudes sociologiques. Geneva: Droz.
  43. Piaget J. (1974). Histoire et developpement de la
    causalite. Raison Presente, 30, 5—20.
  44. Piaget J., Inhelder B. (1966). La psychologie de l'enfant. Paris: PUF.
  45. Piaget J., Szeminska A. (1941). La genese du nombre. Neuchatel: Delachaux et Nietstle.`
  46. Psaltis C., Duveen G. (2006). Social relations and cognitive development: The influence of conversation type and representations of gender // European Journal of Social Psychology. 36.
  47. Rigotti E. (2006). Relevance of context-bound loci to topical potential in the argumentation stage // Argumentation. 20.
  48. Rigotti E., Greco Morasso S. (2009). Argumentation as an object of interest and as a social and cultural resource //N. Muller Mirza, A.N. Perret-Clermont (Eds.) Argumentation and Education. Theoretical Foundations and Practices.N. Y.: Springer.
  49. Rigotti E., Rocci E. (2006). Towards a definition of communication context. Foundations of an interdisciplinary approach to communication // Studies in Communication Sciences. 6 (2).
  50. Schubauer-Leoni M. L., Perret-Clermont A.N. (1997). Social interactions and mathematics learning // P. Bryant,T. Nunes (еds.). Learning and teaching mathematics. An international perspective. Hove: Psychology Press.
  51. Schwarz B. B. (2009). Argumentation and learning. In N. Muller Mirza, A.N. Perret-Clermont (еds.) Argumentation and Education. Theoretical Foundations and Practices.N. Y.: Springer.
  52. Schwarz B. B., Neuman Y., Biezuner S. (2000). Two wrongs may make a right...if they argue together! // Cognition and Instruction. 18 (4).
  53. Schwarz B. B., Neuman Y., Gil J., Ilya M. (2003). Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentative activity // The Journal of the Learning Sciences.12 (2).
  54. Tiberghien A., Malkoun L. (2007). Differenciation des pratiques d'enseignement et acquisitions des eleves du point de vue du savoir // Education et Didactique. 1.
  55. Trognon A. (1999). Elements d'analyse interlocutoire // M. Gilly, J-P. Roux, A. Trognon (еds.). Apprendre dans l'interaction: analyse des mediations semiotiques. Nancy:Presses Universitaires.
  56. Trognon A., Saint-Dizier de Almeida V., Grossen M. (1999). Resolution conjointe d'un probleme arithmetique //M. Gilly, J.-P. Roux, A. Trognon (еds.). Apprendre dans l'interaction: analyse des mediations semiotiques. Nancy: Presses Universitaires.
  57. Viennot L. (еd.) (1979). Le raisonnement spontane en dynamique elementaire. Paris: Hermann.
  58. Viennot L. (1989). Obstacle epistemologique et raisonnement en physique: tendance au contournement des conflits chez les enseignants // N. Bednarz, C. Garnier (еds.).Construction des savoirs. Ottawa: ARC.
  59. Von Aufschnaiter C., Erduran S., Osborne J., Simon S. (2007). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: case studies of how students' argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge // Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 45 (1).
  60. Vygotskij L. S. (1934). Myslenie i rec. Psichologiceskie issledovanija. Moskva-Leningrad: Gosudarstvennoe Social'no-Ekonomiceskoe Izdatel'stvo (Engl. tr. Thought and Language. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1962).
  61. Walton D. (2006). Fundamentals of critical argumentation: critical reasoning and argumentation. N. Y.: Cambridge University Press.
О проекте PsyJournals.ruЛауреат XIV национального психологического конкурса «Золотая Психея» по итогам 2012 года

© 1997–2019 Портал психологических изданий PsyJournals.ru  Все права защищены

Свидетельство регистрации СМИ Эл № ФС77-66447 от 14 июля 2016 г.


Лауреат XIV национального психологического конкурса «Золотая Психея» по итогам 2012 года