The Evaluation of Argument Mapping

The current study compared the effects on comprehension and memory of learning via text versus learning via argument map. Argument mapping is a method of diagrammatic representation of arguments designed to simplify the reading of an argument structure and allow for easy assimilation of core propositions and relations. In the current study 400 undergraduate volunteers were presented with a color map, black-and-white map, or text version of a large (50 bit) or small (30 bit) argument that centred on the question: Can Computers Think? Argument comprehension and memory was tested immediately after a 10 minute study period. Results indicated that participants who studied the argument maps scored more highly than those who studied text, on tests of memory, though not comprehension, and that participants had more difficulty assimilating the large (50 bit) argument in the time allotted. Results are discussed in light of research and theory on human learning and memory. The Evaluation of Argument Mapping 2 The purpose of educational text material is to be read and understood. In addition, in educational contexts, the material must often be memorized as well; more specifically, it must be encoded and stored and be available for recall in an exam context. However, for long pieces of text, learning can be difficult because the creation of an integrated representation in long-term memory is constrained by ongoing storage limitations in working memory (Cowan, 2000; Miller, 1956). Limitations in working memory may constrain long-term memory, but working memory is also thought to be very flexible. Classic definitions of working memory describe a space for both the storage and manipulation of information (Baddeley, 1986). It has long been argued that the ways in which information is manipulated during encoding is critical for later recall (cf. Shimmerlik, 1978). Organizational strategies during encoding account for one such set of manipulations. Organizational strategies are believed to be beneficial in the sense that they provide a retrieval scheme that facilitates recall. For example, by ‘chunking’ related bits of information, recall of one part of a chunk aids retrieval of other parts of the same chunk, thus serving as a retrieval cue (Miller, 1956; Shimmerlik, 1978). Various organizational strategies have been devised to enhance long-term retention of information, including, for example, summarisation (Kintsch & van Dijk, 1978), drawing inferences, generating questions, monitoring for understanding (Dole et al., 1991), constructing representational imagery (Pierce, 1980), and hierarchical summarisation (Taylor, 1982). The bulk of research on organization and memory has examined story memory, and in this regard, evidence suggests that when to-beremembered story events are presented in a well-organized manner, the level of free recall is better than when the events are presented in a random order (Bower et al., The Evaluation of Argument Mapping 3 1969; Myers, 1974). Also, readers who are sensitive to text structure recall more information than readers who are not (Meyer, Brandt & Bluth, 1980). Some researchers have suggested that because it is too memory intensive to remember everything from a passage of text, a macrostructure, or the ‘gist’ of the text, is stored in long-term memory, and this represents the summary information a reader considers important (Kintsch & van Dijk, 1978). Hence, it is this macrostructure, and not the original text that the reader remembers when later asked to recall the text (Kintsch & van Dijk, 1978). The problem with this learning strategy is that although the formulation of a macrostructure presumably facilitates recall of information, it is likely that information is not encoded at a very deep level of specificity; in other words, the detail of propositions and of relations between propositions will probably not be remembered. Hierarchical summarisation is a more explicit, active organisational strategy. It involves extracting and summarising the key themes and sub-themes in a text. Taylor (1982) found that the use of hierarchical summarisation increased recall of text in students who were trained in the use of the technique. A similar study by Berkowitz (1986) provides a rare example of how organizational strategies can be used to facilitate learning of prose arguments. Berkowitz taught students to construct maps of prose passages. Using this mapping strategy, the main ideas from the passages were summarised in separate boxes and supporting claims were listed as bullet points beneath each of the main ideas. The boxes were organized in a radial structure (i.e., around a central claim). Berkowitz found that for students who used this technique overall recall of passages was significantly improved relative to students who used traditional study techniques (i.e., question-answering and rereading