Constructing causal diagrams to learn deliberation

International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 425-445

  Easterday, Matthew W ^a   Aleven, Vincent ^a   Scheines, Richard ^a   Carver, Sharon M ^a  

^a Carnegie Mellon University ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

causal diagrams; deliberation; external representations; Ill defined domains

Indexed keywords

EID: 78650110684     PISSN: 15604292     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Ainsworth, S. E. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183-98.
2. Britt, M. A., & Aglinskas, C. (2002). Improving students' ability to identify and use source information. Cognition and Instruction, 20(4), 485-522.
3. Britt, M. A., Rouet, J. F., Georgi, M. C., & Perfetti, C. A. (1994). Learning from history texts: From causal analysis to argument models. In G. Leinhardt, I. L. Beck, & C. Stainton (Eds.) Teaching and Learning in History (pp. 47-84). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4. Carnegie Corporation of New York, & CIRCLE: The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement (2003). The civic mission of schools. New York: Carnegie Corp. of New York.
5. Carr, C. S. (2003). Using computer supported argument visualization to teach legal argumentation. In P. A. Kirschner, S. J. Buckingham Shum, & C. S. Carr (Eds.) Visualizing Argumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and Educational Sense-making (pp. 75-96). London: Springer-Verlag.
6. Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (2001). Models of data: A theory of how people evaluate data. Cognition and Instruction, 19(3), 323-93.
7. Cox, R. (1996). Analytical reasoning with multiple external representations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Edinburgh, England.
8. Easterday, M. W., Aleven, V., & Scheines, R. (2007a). 'Tis better to construct or to receive? Effect of diagrams on analysis of social policy. In R. Luckin, K. R. Koedinger, & J. Greer (Eds.) Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 93-100). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
9. Easterday, M. W., Aleven, V., & Scheines, R. (2007b). The logic of Babel: Causal reasoning from conflicting sources. In V. Aleven, K. Ashley, C. Lynch, & N. Pinkwart (Eds.) Proceedings of the Workshop on AIED Applications of Ill-Defined Domains at the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 31-40). Los Angeles, CA.
10. Easterday, M. W., Alevan, V., Scheines, R., & Carver, S. M. (2009). Will Google destroy western democracy? Bias in policy problem solving. In V. Dimitrova, R. Mizoguchi, B. du Boulay, & A. Graesser (Eds.) Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 249-256). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
11. Easterday, M. W., Kanarek, J., & Harrell, M. (2009). Design requirements of argument mapping software for teaching deliberation. In T. Davies, & S. P. Gangadharan (Eds.) Online Deliberation: Design, Research, and Practice. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
12. Fishkin, J. S. (1995). The voice of the people: Public opinion and democracy. London: Yale University Press.
13. Forbus, K. D., Carney, K., Sherin, B. L., & Ureel, L. C. (2005). VModel: A visual qualitative modeling environment for middle-school students. AI Magazine, 26(3), 63-72.
14. Graesser, A. C., Wiley, J., Goldman, S. R., O'Reilly, T., Jeon, M., & McDaniel, B. (2007). SEEK web tutor: Fostering a critical stance while exploring the causes of volcanic eruption. Metacognition Learning, 2, 89-105.
15. Grossen, B., & Carnine, D. (1990). Diagramming a logic strategy: Effects on difficult problem types and transfer. Learning Disability Quarterly, 13(3), 168-82.
16. Hall, V. C., Bailey, J., & Tillman, C. (1997). Can student-generated illustrations be worth ten thousand words? Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(4), 677-81.
17. Harrell, M. (2008). No computer program required: Even pencil-and-paper argument mapping improves critical thinking skills. Teaching Philosophy, 31, 351-374.
18. Heuer, R. J. (1999). Psychology of intelligence analysis. New York: Novinka Books.
19. Horn, R. E., & Weber, R. P. (2007). New tools for resolving wicked problems: Mess mapping and resolution mapping processes. Retrieved from http://www.strategykinetics.com/files/New-Tools-For-Resolving-Wicked-Problems. pdf
20. Huff, A. S., & Jenkins, M. (Eds.). (2002). Mapping Strategic Knowledge. London: Sage.
21. Joffe, M., & Mindell, J. (2006). Complex causal process diagrams for analyzing the health impacts of policy interventions. American Journal of Public Health, 96(3), 473-9.
22. Jonassen, D., & Ionas, I. (2008). Designing effective supports for causal reasoning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(3), 287-308.
23. Jones, D. K., & Read, S. J. (2005). Expert-novice difference in the understanding and explanation of complex political conflicts. Discourse Processes, 39(1), 45-80.
24. Kirschner, P. A., Buckingham Shum, S. J., & Carr, C. S. (Eds.). (2003). Visualizing Argumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and Educational Sense-making. London: Springer-Verlag.
25. Koedinger, K. R., & Nathan, M. J. (2004). The real story behind story problems: Effects of representations on quantitative reasoning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(2), 129-64.
26. Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for Thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
27. Kuhn, D., & Dean Jr, D. (2004). Connecting scientific reasoning and causal inference. Journal of Cognition and Development, 5(2), 261-88.
28. Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., & O'Loughlin, M. (1988). The Development of Scientific Thinking Skills. San Diego: Academic Press.
29. Kuipers, B., & Kassirer, J. P. (1984). Casual reasoning in medicine: Analysis of a protocol. Cognitive Science, 8(4), 363-85.
30. Leelawong, K., & Biswas, G. (2008). Designing learning by teaching agents: The Betty's Brain system. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 18(3), 181-208.
31. Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(11), 2098-109.
32. Lynch, C. F., Ashley, K. D., Aleven, V. A., & Pinkwart (2006). Defining "ill-defined domains": A literature survey. In V. Aleven, K. Ashley, C. Lynch, & N. Pinkwart (Eds.) Proceedings of the Workshop on Intelligent Tutoring Systems for Ill-Defined Domains at the 8th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 1-10). Jhongli (Taiwan), National Central University.
33. Masterman, L. (2005). A knowledge-based coach for reasoning about historical causation. In C. K. Looi, G. McCalla, B. Bredeweg, & J. Breuker (Eds.) Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 435-42). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
34. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
35. McCrudden, M. T., Schraw, G., Lehman, S., & Poliquin, A. (2007). The effect of causal diagrams on text learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), 367-88.
36. Montibeller, G., & Belton, V. (2006). Causal maps and the evaluation of decision options-a review. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(7), 779-91.
37. Narayanan V. K., & Armstrong D. J. (Eds.). (2005). Causal Mapping for Research in Information Technology. Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
38. Patton, C. V., & Sawicki, D. S. (1993). Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
39. Pawson, R. (2006). Evidence-based Policy: A Realist Perspective. London: Sage.
40. Pearl, J. (2000). Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
41. Perfetti, C. A., Rouet, J. F., & Britt, M. A. (1999). Toward a theory of documents representation. In H. van Oostendorp, & S. R. Goldman (Eds.) The Construction of Mental Representations During Reading (pp. 99-122). Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42. Pinkwart, N., Aleven, V., Ashley, K., & Lynch, C. (2007). Evaluating legal argument instruction with graphical representations using LARGO. In R. Luckin, K. R. Koedinger, & J. Greer (Eds.) Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 101-8). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
43. Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155-69.
44. Salles, P., Bredeweg, B., & Araújo, S. (2006). Qualitative models about stream ecosystem recovery: Exploratory studies. Ecological Modelling, 194 (1-3), 80-9.
45. Scheines, R., Easterday, M., & Danks, D. (2007). Teaching the normative theory of causal reasoning. In A. Gopnik, & L. Schultz (Eds.) Causal learning: Psychology, Philosophy, and Computation (pp. 119-38). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
46. Simon, H. A. (1996). Social planning: Designing the evolving artifact. In H. A. Simon (Ed.), The Sciences of the Artificial (3rd ed.) Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
47. Spirtes, P., Glymour, C., & Scheines, R. (2000). Causation, Prediction, and Search (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48. Stull, A. T., & Mayer, R. E. (2007). Learning by doing versus learning by viewing: Three experimental comparisons of learner-generated versus author-provided graphic organizers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(4), 808-20.
49. Suthers, D. D., & Hundhausen, C. D. (2003). An experimental study of the effects of representational guidance on collaborative learning processes. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 183-218.
50. Suthers, D. D., Weiner, A., Connelly, J., & Paolucci, M. (1995). Belvedere: Engaging students in critical discussion of science and public policy issues. In J. Greer (Ed.), Proceedings of the 7th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 266-273). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
51. Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755-69.
52. Twardy, C. R. (2004). Argument maps improve critical thinking. Teaching Philosophy, 27(2), 95-116.
53. Van Gelder, T. J. (2003). Enhancing deliberation through computer supported visualization. In P. A. Kirschner, S. J. Buckingham Shum, & C. S. Carr (Eds.) Visualizing Argumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and Educational Sense-making (pp. 97-115). London: Springer-Verlag.
54. Voss, J. F. (2005). Toulmin's Model and the solving of ill-structured problems. Argumentation, 19(3), 321-9.
55. Voss, J. F., Carretero, M., Kennet, J., & Silfies, L. N. (1994). The collapse of the soviet union: A case study in causal reasoning. In M. Carretero, & J. F. Voss (Eds.), Cognitive and Instructional Processes in History and the Social Sciences (pp. 403-29). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
56. Voss, J. F., Tyler, S. W., & Yengo, L. A. (1983). Individual differences in the solving of social science problems. In R. F. Dillion, & R. R. Schmeck (Eds.) Individual Differences in Cognition (pp. 205-32). New York: Academic Press.
57. Walker, W, & Fisher, G. (1994). Public Policy Analysis: A Brief Definition (Document. No. P-7856). Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
58. Zimmerman (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27(2), 172-223.