Jordi Domènech-Casal, Carolina Sepúlveda, Anna Marbà-Tallada. at ESERA Congress 2019 Bologna. Pseudosciences are becoming a conflict on public health, that can be addressed from Science Education through argumentation and development of the understanding of Nature of Science. We present a preliminary study on (35, 14-years-old) students’ abilities to identify and weight different types of arguments and look for associations with their positioning on Pseudosciences. Our results confirm the gender bias on Pseudociences positioning described in the literature, but not relevant differences on their identification and weighting of different types of arguments. We discuss participation of non-epistemic factors on students’ positioning on Pseudosciences.

1. EPISTEMIC CONCERNS ON
STUDENTS’ USE OF ARGUMENTS
ON PSEUDOSCIENCES
Jordi Domènech-Casal, Carolina Sepúlveda, Anna Marbà-Tallada
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB)

2. Introduction
Nature of
Science
(NOS) [3]
Epistemic
dimension of
Scientific
Competence [1]
Epistemic
Cognition [2]
Argumentation
[4]
Sci-tizenship
Pseudosciences
[1] OECD
[2] Kolsto
[3] Lederman
[4] Jiménez-Aleixandre

3. Introduction
Positioning on
Pseudosciences
Ability to identify Kinds
of Arguments
Giving weight to kinds of
Arguments
Which should be the didactic strategy to modify student’s
positioning on Pseudosciences?

4. Introduction
• MINECO (2016). Pseudosciences and
Tecnophobia are supported by more than half
of the population (Homeopathy,
Acupuncture...). Increased in women (gender
bias), young and high academic level.
• Pseudosciences positioning might be
dependent not only on argumentation or
epistemic skills.

5. Goals
1) Which are students’ preferences/abilities to
identify and weight different types of
arguments?
2) Are there gender differences in these
preferences?
3) Which is the relationship between argument
preferences and positioning on pseudoscientific
proposals?

6. Methodology
(Different kinds of arguments where identified in this activity)
35, 14 years-old students (19 male and 16 female students)
Positioning on Pseudosciences
Likert survey asking how much certainty (1 10) they gave
to several propositions related to Pseudosciences and
Technofobia.
Data collected and analyzed grouped by gender.

7. Methodology
Model
Authority
Data
Habits
Argument Identification and Weighting
“This is not the
case, because
Plate Tectonics,...”
“Doctors says,...”
“Study shows that
un 60% of
cases,...”
“This is a
traditional
technique...”

8. Methodology (Activity)
Acupuncture
Homeopathy
Vaccines
Reading Prepared texts with
different kinds of arguments.
Identifying and Weighting
Arguments
1month1month
Data
collected
and
analyzed
grouped
by gender.

9. Methodology (Scaffolds)
Favour Argument Against
“Presenting the antigen to the immune system
elicits a stronguer immunologic response” (3)
Model
Authority
“The graph of incidence of infectious illnesses
shows correspondence with vaccination
campaigns”(2)
Data “A case of severe reaction to a vaccine was
reported in…”(1)
Habits “Humanity has overcome illness through
centuries with no need from vaccines” (1)
“Argument
Scale”

10. Methodology (Data collection and
analysis)
Vaccines
• Total number of correctly
identified arguments
• Total weight for each kind of
argument.
Homeopathy
• Total number of correctly
identified arguments
• Total weight for each kind of
argument.
Mean
values
calculated
by genders
Mean
values
calculated
by genders

11. Results
Positioning on
Pseudosciences
and Technophobia
Slight, but visible
differences on
Pseudosciences end
Technophobia
positioning
Homeopathy
Acupuncture
Horoscope
Vaccines Transgenics
AI
Wi-Fi
0
5
10
Male Students
Female Students
*Horoscope & Vaccines

12. Model
Authority
Data
Habits0
1
2
Argument Identification
Vaccines Male Students
Vaccines Female Students
Homeopathy Male Students
Homeopathy Female Students
*Authority Vaccines
Argument
Identification
Similar results not
depending on gender
or topic
Results

13. ResultsModel
Authority
Data
Habits0
2
4
Argument Weigth
Vaccines Male Students
Vaccines Female Students
Homeopathy Male Students
Homeopathy Female Students
*Homeopathy Model
Argument Weighting
Similar results not
depending on gender
or topic
Results

14. Conclusions
1) Arguments Identification and Weighting do
not depend on topic or gender.
2) Small gender differences on positioning on
Pseudosciences or Technophobia.
3) Apparently, these differences would not
come from differences on Argumentation
abilities measured.

15. Positioning on
Pseudosciences
Ability to identify Kinds
of Arguments
Giving weight to kinds of
Arguments
Conclusions
“Science Exclusion”
Autoperception
Gender-association of
positioning on
Pseudosciences and STEM
would be a deflection
(secondary association) from
a main parameter: “Science
exclusion” auto-perception,
regardless of the gender.
STEM
Careers
Preliminary work.
• Science-Exclusion, Positioning on Pseudosciences, Ability to Identify and Weight Arguments.
• Correlations at individual level and ways to promote change.

16. EPISTEMIC CONCERNS ON
STUDENTS’ USE OF ARGUMENTS
ON PSEUDOSCIENCES
Jordi Domènech-Casal, Carolina Sepúlveda, Anna Marbà-Tallada
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB)
This presentation and materials at: https://wp.me/p25seH-E1
This research was funded by the Spanish Government (grant
number EDU2015-66643-C2-1-P) and carried out within the
ACELEC research group, aknowledged by the Catalan
Government (grant number 2017SGR1399).