Abstract
The present study examined the role of conflict topics and individual differences in epistemic perspectives (absolutism, multiplism, and evaluativism) in students' explanations of expert conflicts. University students (N = 184) completed an epistemic thinking assessment and a conflict explanation assessment regarding two controversies in biology and history. Additionally, thirty students were interviewed and provided detailed conflict explanations that were used to interpret and extend the quantitative results. In the biology problem, conflicts were predominantly attributed to topic complexity and to research methods. In the history problem, conflicts were also predominantly attributed to topic complexity, but also to researchers' personal backgrounds and motivations. Epistemic perspectives were related to specific conflict explanations, suggesting that these perspectives have a role beyond topic differences. Thus, both conflict topics and epistemic perspectives shape lay explanations of experts' conflicts. The findings highlight differences in students’ interpretations of the roles experts play in knowledge construction.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
