Complejidad argumentativa escrita en estudiantes universitarios en tareas académicas y sociocientíficas
; Castellaro, Mariano Andrés 
Otros responsables
Fecha
01/2021
Editorial
Asociación Mexicana de Alternativas en Psicología A.C.
Revista
Alternativas en Psicología
Título del libro
Nombre del evento
Fecha del evento
Institución organizadora
ISSN
1405-339X
eISSN
2007-5251
ISBN
Idioma
Español
Tipo del evento
Clasificación temática
Palabras clave
Resumen
El estudio de la argumentación en la universidad constituye un campo de creciente interés, en tanto elemento clave del aprendizaje. Se comparó la complejidad argumentativa escrita en ingresantes de Psicología en dos tareas: sociocientífica y académica. Participaron 60 estudiantes: 30 realizaron la tarea sociocientífica (cierre de una central nuclear) y30la tarea académica (uso de terapia conductista en autismo infantil). En ambos casos se brindaban argumentos a favor y en contra, y el sujeto debía elaborar una posición escrita. La producción total de textos argumentativos fue similar a la de textos no argumentativos. En la tarea académica predominó la diferencia de opinión principal no mixta (única y múltiple) y las estructuras argumentales simple y compleja múltiple. La tarea sociocientífica se caracterizó por la diferencia de opinión múltiple. Se concluye sobre la relevancia teórica del aspecto contextual de la tarea (interés, conocimiento y especificidad para el sujeto) en la argumentación.
The study of argumentation at university is a growing field since it is a learning key. The written argumentative complexity in undergraduate Psychology students was compared between socio-scientific and academic tasks. Participants were 60 students: 30 performed the socio-scientific task (closure of a nuclear power plant) and 30 performed the academic task (use of behavioral therapy in child autism). In both tasks, it was given arguments in favor and against the situation, and the subject had to elaborate a written position. The global frequency of argumentative texts was like the global frequency of non-argumentative texts. In the academic task prevailed the non-mixed (single and multiple) opinion difference and single-multiple complex argumentative structures. The socio-scientific task was characterized by multiple opinion difference. It was concluded about the conceptual relevance of contextual dimension of task related to argumentation (interest, knowledge, and specificity for the subject).
The study of argumentation at university is a growing field since it is a learning key. The written argumentative complexity in undergraduate Psychology students was compared between socio-scientific and academic tasks. Participants were 60 students: 30 performed the socio-scientific task (closure of a nuclear power plant) and 30 performed the academic task (use of behavioral therapy in child autism). In both tasks, it was given arguments in favor and against the situation, and the subject had to elaborate a written position. The global frequency of argumentative texts was like the global frequency of non-argumentative texts. In the academic task prevailed the non-mixed (single and multiple) opinion difference and single-multiple complex argumentative structures. The socio-scientific task was characterized by multiple opinion difference. It was concluded about the conceptual relevance of contextual dimension of task related to argumentation (interest, knowledge, and specificity for the subject).
Colecciones
Aprobación
Revisión
Complementado por
Referenciado por
Licencia Creative Commons
Excepto donde se indique lo contrario, la licencia de este ítem se describe como by-nc-sa
