Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Social argumentation in online synchronous communication

  • Published:
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The ability to argue well is a valuable skill for students in both formal and informal learning environments. While many studies have explored the argumentative practices in formal environments and some researchers have developed tools to enhance the argumentative skills, the social argumentation that is occurring in informal spaces has yet to be broadly investigated. The challenges associated with observing and capturing the interactions in authentic settings can be identified as the main reasons for this deficiency. On the other hand, the advancements in information technologies and the way these improvements lift the barriers between school and afterschool settings present ways to eliminate these challenges. To this end, this study utilizes a popular Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game (MMORPG), World of Warcraft (WoW), which provides an authentic environment, to investigate the quality of argumentation in online synchronous communication without interfering with the substantial characteristics of the interaction. The results of the study demonstrate the quality of argumentation skills that a group of adolescents are displaying in online synchronous WoW chat as well as the patterns that emerge from the interplay between a number of contextual variables including synchronicity, interest, and authenticity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.wowhead.com/forums&topic=134299/what-is-the-average-time-played

  2. www.wowwiki.com

References

  • Alexander, P. A., Kulikowich, J. M., & Schulze, S. K. (1994). The influence of topic knowledge, domain knowledge, and interest on the comprehension of scientific exposition. Learning and Individual Differences, 6, 379–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andriessen, J., Baker, M., & Suthers, D. (2003a). Argumentation, computer support, and the educational context of confronting cognitions. In J. Andriessen, M. J. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (Vol. 1, pp. 1–25). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andriessen, J., Erkens, G., Van De Laak, C., Peters, N., & Coirier, P. (2003b). Argumentation as negotiation in electronic collaborative writing. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (Vol. 1, pp. 1–25). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2010). Online moderation of synchronous e-argumentation. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(3), 259–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, M., Andriessen, J., Lund, K., van Amelsvoort, M., & Quignard, M. (2007). Rainbow: A framework for analysing computer-mediated pedagogical debates. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2), 315–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barab, S.A., Gresalfi, M., Ingram-Goble, A., Jameson, E., Hickey, D., Akram, S., et al. (2009). Transformational play and virtual worlds: Worked examples from the Quest Atlantis project. International Journal of Learning and Media, 1(2).

  • Bessiere, K., Seay, A., & Kiesler, S. (2007). The ideal Elf: Identity exploration in world of warcraft. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 10, 530–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boscolo, P., & Mason, L. (2003). Topic knowledge, text coherence, and interest. How they interact in learning from instructional texts. Journal of Experimental Education, 71, 126–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, J. C. C., Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2009). Asynchronous online discussion thread development: Examining growth patterns and peer-facilitation techniques. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25, 438–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. (1997). Being there: Putting brain, body, and world together again. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. (2007). Assessing dialogic argumentation in online environments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 293–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, D. B., D’Angelo, C. M., & Menekse, M. (2009). Initial structuring of online discussions to improve learning and argumentation: Incorporating students’ own explanations as seed comments versus an augmented-preset approach to seeding discussions. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(4), 321–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state standards for english language arts& literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects.

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper Perennial.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Moor, A., & Efimova, L. (2004). An argumentation analysis of weblog conversations. Paper presented at the 9th International Working Conference on the Language-Action Perspective on Communication Modelling (LAP 2004), New Brunswick.

  • De Vries, E., Lund, K., & Baker, M. (2002). Computer-mediated epistemic dialogue: Explanation and argumentation as vehicles for understanding scientific notions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 63–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dede, C., Ketelhut, D., & Ruess, K. (2003). Motivation, usability, and learning outcomes in a prototype museum-based multiuser virtual environment. In P. Bell, R. Stevens, & T. Satwicz (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth ICLS. Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felton, M., & Kuhn, D. (2001). The development of argumentive discourse skills. Discourse Processes, 32, 135–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave/Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. P. (2005). Learning by design: Good video games as learning machines. E-Learning, 2(1), 5–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graff, G. (2003). Clueless in academe: How schooling obscures the life of the mind. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammersley, M. (1990). Reading ethnographic research: A critical guide. New York: Longman Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1995). Ethnography (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hidi, S. (2001). Interest, reading, and learning: Theoretical and practical considerations. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 191–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isenberg, D. J. (1986). Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 1141–1151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, J., Erkens, G., & Kanselaar, G. (2007). Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1105–1125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H., Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robinson, A. J., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Chicago: MacArthur Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, A. C. (2003). The sequential analysis of group interaction and critical thinking in online. American Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 25–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Junker, B. H. (1960). Field work: An introduction to the social sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, I.-H., Anderson, R. C., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., & Archodidou, A. (2007). Discourse patterns during children’s collaborative online discussions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(3), 333–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P. A., Shum, S. J. B., & Carr, C. S. (2003). Visualizing argumentation: Software tools for collaborative and educational sense-making. London: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Krapp, A. (1999). Interest, motivation, and learning: An educational-psychological perspective. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 23–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D. (1992). Thinking as argument. Harvard Educational Review, 62(2), 155–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D., Goh, W., Iordanou, K., & Shaenfield, D. (2008). Arguing on the computer: A microgenetic study of developing argument skills in a computer-supported environment. Child Development, 79(5), 1310–1328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leitão, S. (2000). The potential of argument in knowledge building. Human Development, 43(6), 332–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linnenbrink, R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 313–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, L., & Scirica, F. (2006). Prediction of students’ argumentation skills about controversial topics by epistemological understanding. Learning and Instruction, 16, 492–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Means, M. L., & Voss, J. F. (1996). Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels. Cognition and Instruction, 14(2), 139–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muller Mirza, N., & Perret-Clermont, A.-N. (2009). Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices (1st ed.). Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, E. M. (2008). Using Argumentation Vee Diagrams (AVDs) for promoting argument–counterargument integration in reflective writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 549–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 994–1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 31(6), 459–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, C., & Wells, S. (2007). Dialogical argument as an interface to complex debates. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 22(6), 60–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renninger, K. A. (2000). Individual interest and its implications for understanding intrinsic motivation. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic motivation: Controversies and new directions (pp. 373–404). San Diego: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, L. B., Salmon, M., Zeitz, C. M., Wathen, S. H., & Holowchak, M. (1993). Reasoning in conversation. Cognition and Instruction, 11, 347–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosas, O., & Dhen, G. (2012). One self to rule them all: A critical discourse analysis of French-Speaking Players’ identity construction in world of warcraft. In N. Zagalo, L. Morgado & A. Boa-Ventura (Eds), Virtual worlds and metaverse platforms: New communication and identity paradigms. Hershey: IGI Global Publishing.

  • Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. N. (1987). Transfer of cognitive skills from programming: When and how? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3, 149–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheuer, O., Loll, F., Pinkwart, N., & McLaren, B. M. (2010). Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state of the art. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(1), 43–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiefele, U. (1996). Topic interest, text representation, and quality of experience. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 19e42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiefele, U. (1998). Individual interest and learning, what we know and what we don’t know. In L. Hoffman, A. Krapp, K. Renninger, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Interest and learning: Proceedings of the Seeon Conference on Interest and Gender (pp. 91–104). Kiel: IPN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simkins, D., & Steinkuehler, C. (2008). Critical ethical reasoning & role play. Games & Culture, 3, 333–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Jacobson, M. J., & Coulson, R. L. (1991). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Educational Technology, 31, 24–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Squire, K. D., & Jan, M. (2007). Mad city mystery: Developing scientific argumentation skills with a place-based augmented reality game on handheld computers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 5–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2007). CSCL and its flash themes. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (ijCSCL), 2(4), 359–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2007). Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction with computer-supported collaboration scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(4), 421–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinkuehler, C., & Chmiel, M. (2006). Fostering scientific habits of mind in the context of online play. In S. A. Barab, K. E. Hay, N. B. Songer, & D. T. Hickey (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 723–729). Mahwah: Erlbuam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinkuehler, C., & Duncan, S. (2008). Scientific habits of mind in virtual worlds. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(6), 530–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinkuehler, C., & Williams, D. (2006). Where everybody knows your (screen) name: Online games as “third places.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(4), 885–909.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinkuehler, C., & Williams, C. (2009). Math as narrative in World of Warcraft forum discussions. The International Journal of Learning and Media, 1(3).

  • Steinkuehler, C., Compton-Lilly, C., & King, E. (2010). Reading in the context of online games. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Learning in the disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2010) volume 1, full papers (pp. 222–230). Chicago: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suthers, D., Weiner, A., Connelly, J., & Paolucci, M. (1995). Belvedere: Engaging students in critical discussion of science and public policy issues.

  • Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the internet. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Gelder, T. (2002). Argument mapping with Reason!Able. The American Philosophical Association Newsletter on Philosophy and Computers, 2(1), 85–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, D. N. (1989). Informal logic: A handbook for critical argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, D. N. (1996). Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah:Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Walton, D. N., & Krabbe, E. C. W. (1995). Commitment in dialogue: Basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yee, N., Ducheneaut, N., Nelson, L., & Likarish, P. (2011). Introverted elves and conscientious gnomes. The expression of personality in world of warcraft. Proceedings of CHI, 2011, 753–762.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Constance Steinkuehler for her guidance and valuable feedback throughout this research. Many thanks also to the associate editor and anonymous reviewers for their suggestions that substantially improved the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Wisconsin- Madison, 1513 University Ave., Madison, WI, 53705, USA

    Esra Alagoz

  2. Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey

    Esra Alagoz

Authors
  1. Esra Alagoz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Esra Alagoz.

Appendix

Appendix

figure a

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Alagoz, E. Social argumentation in online synchronous communication. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn. 8, 399–426 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-013-9183-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-013-9183-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation