Collaborative argumentation and justifications: A statistical discourse analysis of online discussions

Jingyan LU , Ming Ming CHIU, Wai Ying Nancy LAW

Research output: Contribution to journalArticles

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

As justifications (such as evidence or explanations) are central to productive argumentation, this study examines how the discourse moves of students engaged in collaborative learning are related to their justifications during computer mediated communication (CMC). Twenty-four students posted 131 messages on Knowledge Forum, an online collaborative learning environment. These messages were coded and analyzed with a multiple outcome, multilevel logit, vector autoregression. When students disagreed or made claims, they were more likely to use evidence. After a student made an alternative claim, the next student posting a message was less likely to use evidence. When students made claims, disagreed, disagreed with other's justifications, or read more messages, they were more likely to use explanations. Boys were more likely than girls to make new claims. Together, these results suggest that discourse moves and sequences are linked to justifications on online forums. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)946-955
JournalComputers in Human Behavior
Volume27
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2011

Citation

Lu, J., Chiu, M. M., & Law, N. W. Y. (2011). Collaborative argumentation and justifications: A statistical discourse analysis of online discussions. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 946-955.

Keywords

  • Computer mediated communication
  • Argumentation
  • Justification
  • Collaborative learning
  • Discourse analysis

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Collaborative argumentation and justifications: A statistical discourse analysis of online discussions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.