Where the difference lies: Predicting inter-disciplinary differences in epistemological beliefs

Abstract

Perry (1970) proposed that each of us has a set of beliefs, known as epistemological beliefs, which represent our implicit assumptions about knowledge. A large body of research has explored the concept of difference in epistemological beliefs between different disciplines. Previous studies have used Biglan’s (1973b) taxonomy, which divides disciplines into binary categories such as hard/soft or applied/pure, as a basis for predicting inter-disciplinary differences in epistemological beliefs. However, this approach overlooks the possibility of significant differences in epistemological beliefs between disciplines in the same category. The current study aimed to confirm the usefulness of one of Biglan’s (1973a) original dimensions, the hard/soft dimension, in predicting inter-disciplinary epistemological differences while at the same time establishing whether significant within-category differences did exist. Using the epistemological beliefs questionnaire from O’Siochru (2006) the epistemological beliefs of 497 students from eight academic disciplines were compared. Results confirmed that significant differences in epistemological beliefs existed between the disciplines and that the pattern of differences was consistent with the disciplines’ positions on Biglan’s (1973a) hard/soft dimension. Furthermore, results revealed significant differences between disciplines that were in the same category. The discussion reviews the reliability of the beliefs measure and the need for further development of Biglan’s model.