↓ Skip to main content

Formal and Informal Learning and First-Year Psychology Students’ Development of Scientific Thinking: A Two-Wave Panel Study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Formal and Informal Learning and First-Year Psychology Students’ Development of Scientific Thinking: A Two-Wave Panel Study
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00133
Pubmed ID
Authors

Demet Soyyılmaz, Laura M. Griffin, Miguel H. Martín, Šimon Kucharský, Ekaterina D. Peycheva, Nina Vaupotič, Peter A. Edelsbrunner

Abstract

Scientific thinking is a predicate for scientific inquiry, and thus important to develop early in psychology students as potential future researchers. The present research is aimed at fathoming the contributions of formal and informal learning experiences to psychology students' development of scientific thinking during their 1st-year of study. We hypothesize that informal experiences are relevant beyond formal experiences. First-year psychology student cohorts from various European countries will be assessed at the beginning and again at the end of the second semester. Assessments of scientific thinking will include scientific reasoning skills, the understanding of basic statistics concepts, and epistemic cognition. Formal learning experiences will include engagement in academic activities which are guided by university authorities. Informal learning experiences will include non-compulsory, self-guided learning experiences. Formal and informal experiences will be assessed with a newly developed survey. As dispositional predictors, students' need for cognition and self-efficacy in psychological science will be assessed. In a structural equation model, students' learning experiences and personal dispositions will be examined as predictors of their development of scientific thinking. Commonalities and differences in predictive weights across universities will be tested. The project is aimed at contributing information for designing university environments to optimize the development of students' scientific thinking.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Greece 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 62 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 18%
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Lecturer 4 6%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 19 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 28%
Social Sciences 10 15%
Arts and Humanities 3 5%
Computer Science 2 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 20 31%