'Tis Better to Construct than to Receive? The Effects of Diagram Tools on Causal Reasoning

Previous research on the use of diagrams for argumentation instruction has highlighted, but not conclusively demonstrated, their potential benefits. We examine the relative benefits of using diagrams and diagramming tools to teach causal reasoning about public policy. Sixty-three Carnegie Mellon University students were asked to analyze short policy texts using either: 1) text only, 2) text and a pre-made, correct diagram representing the causal claims in the text, or 3) text and a diagramming tool with which to construct their own causal diagram. After a pretest and training, we tested student performance on a new policy text and found that students given a correct diagram (condition 2 above) significantly outperformed the other groups. Finally, we compared learning by testing students on a third policy problem in which we removed all diagram or tool aids and found that students who constructed their own diagrams (condition 3 above) learned the most. We describe these results and interpret them in a way that foreshadows work we now plan for a cognitive-tutor on causal diagram construction.

[1]  Vernon C. Hall,et al.  Can Student-Generated Illustrations Be Worth Ten Thousand Words?. , 1997 .

[2]  S. Ainsworth.  DeFT: A Conceptual Framework for Considering Learning with Multiple Representations. , 2006 .

[3]  Olusola O. Adesope,et al.  Learning With Concept and Knowledge Maps: A Meta-Analysis , 2006 .

[4]  P. V. Meter,et al.  Drawing construction as a strategy for learning from text. , 2001 .

[5]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Why a Diagram is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[6]  P. Johnson-Laird,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article HOW DIAGRAMS CAN IMPROVE REASONING , 2022 .

[7]  P. Spirtes,et al.  Causation, Prediction, and Search, 2nd Edition , 2001 .

[8]  Laura R. Novick,et al.  To Matrix, Network, or Hierarchy: That Is the Question , 2001, Cognitive Psychology.

[9]  Matthew Wayne Easterday,et al.  Design requirements of argument mapping software for teaching deliberation , 2009 .

[10]  Maralee Harrell,et al.  Using Argument Diagramming Software in the Classroom , 2005 .

[11]  Tom Burr,et al.  Causation, Prediction, and Search , 2003, Technometrics.

[12]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  Toward Legal Argument Instruction with Graph Grammars and Collaborative Filtering Techniques , 2006, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[13]  D. Perkins,et al.  Informal reasoning and education , 1991 .

[14]  Ramon Prudencio S. Toledo.  Visualizing Argumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and Educational Sense-Making , 2005, Inf. Vis..

[15]  Bonnie Grossen,et al.  Diagramming a Logic Strategy: Effects on Difficult Problem Types and Transfer , 1990 .

[16]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  An Empirical Study of the Effects of Representational Guidance on Collaborative Learning. , 2003 .

[17]  D. Kuhn.  THE SKILLS OF ARGUMENT , 2008, Education for Thinking.

[18]  Henry Prakken,et al.  A critical review of argument visualization tools: Do users become better reasoners? , 2006 .

[19]  R. Mayer,et al.  Aids to computer-based multimedia learning , 2002 .

[20]  Richard Cox.  Analytical reasoning with multiple external representations , 1996 .

[21]  Matthew W. Easterday,et al.  Teaching the Normative Theory of Causal Reasoning , 2007 .

[22]  D. Kuhn.  Education for Thinking , 1986, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[23]  Maralee Harrell,et al.  The Improvement of Critical Thinking Skills in What Philosophy , 2004 .

[24]  R. Cox.  Representation construction, externalised cognition and individual differences , 1999 .

[25]  J. Pearl.  Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference , 2000 .

[26]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  External cognition: how do graphical representations work? , 1996, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[27]  Mitchell J. Nathan,et al.  The Real Story Behind Story Problems: Effects of Representations on Quantitative Reasoning , 2004 .