Studying and using multiple documents in history: Effects of discipline expertise
Studying and using multiple documents in history: Effects of discipline expertise
复制标题
DOI：
10.1207/s1532690xci1501_3
复制
发表时间：
1997-01-01
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Perfetti, CA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Rouet, JF;Favart, M;Perfetti, CA
在历史上的广泛培训结果的方法和信息来源的历史问题的典型，即学科专业知识的一般知识。我们调查了学科专业知识对学生阅读、评价和使用关于一个历史争议的多个文献的影响。11名心理学研究生（历史新手）和8名历史学研究生（历史专家）研究了关于巴拿马运河历史的两个争议。对于每一个争议，学生们研究了一组文件，写了一篇观点文章，并评估了文件的有用性和可信度。研究策略在各组之间没有显著差异。然而，对有用性的评估因文件类型和学生专业知识的不同而有所不同。此外，新手和专家学生在表达和支持他们的文章中的观点的方式不同。我们建议，学科专业知识可以帮助历史系学生将信息来源和解释与他们对情况或问题的表述联系起来。
Extensive training in history results in generalized knowledge of the methods and information sources typical of history problems, that is, discipline expertise. We investigated the influence of discipline expertise on students' reading, evaluation, and use of multiple documents about a historical controversy. Eleven graduate students in psychology (history novices) and 8 graduate students in history (history specialists) studied 2 controversies about the history of the Panama Canal. For each controversy, the students studied a set of documents, wrote an opinion essay, and evaluated the documents for usefulness and trustworthiness. Study strategies did not differ significantly across groups. However, the evaluation of usefulness varied as a function of document type and students' expertise. Furthermore, novice and expert students differed in the way they expressed and supported an opinion in their essay. We suggest that discipline expertise helps history students connect information sources and interpretations to their representation of the situation or problem.