| Previous work has attempted to account for the factors involved in conceptual change (e.g. Posner, Strike, Hewson & Gertzog, 1982; Pintrich, Marx & Boyle, 1993). While progress has been made, cognitive restructuring remains to be positioned within a unifying theory of change. Here, a new model of conceptual change is put forward. The Persuasion Model of conceptual change builds on previous frameworks (Posner, Strike, Hewson & Gertzog, 1982; Pintrich, Marx & Boyle, 1993; Vosniadou, 1994) including the psychology of persuasion (Heuristic-Systematic Model, Chaiken, 1980; Elaboration Likelihood Model, Petty & Cacioppo, 1986; Social Judgement Theory, Sherif & Hovland, 1953) and cognitive and motivational theories of learning (Johnson-Laird, 1983; Mayer & Moreno, 1988; Wittrock, 1974b). High quality, elaborative processing of a persuasive message leads to change. Mental models are positioned as the mechanism by which meaning is created, manipulated, inspected and evaluated. These processes result in a continuum of cognitive restructuring.; A study of conceptual change in Evolutionary Biology examined the viability of the Persuasion Model. It was predicted that knowledge, beliefs, interest and cognitive style would predict elaborative processing. Processing was hypothesized to influence information comprehensibility, plausibility, fruitfulness and compatibility with prior knowledge. Judgments were hypothesized to influence learning outcomes.; Evolutionary knowledge and beliefs were assessed at pre- and posttest in 375 college students using multiple choice, likert-scale and extended response items. Need for Cognition, Need for Cognitive Closure, Epistemological Beliefs, Religiosity, Dogmatism, Moral Values and Argument Evaluation Ability were measured using paper-and-pencil questionnaires. Participants read a text and indicated elaborative processing and information evaluation.; Ninety percent of participants held at least one misconception at pre-test. Significant gains on outcome measures were found. More sophisticated responses were found for items pertaining to non-human than human topics. Elaborative processing was predicted by individual differences in knowledge, beliefs, interest and Need for Cognition. Elaborative processing influenced favorability ratings of the information, and these contributed to learning outcomes. The results show support for hypotheses derived from the Persuasion Model, as conceptual change could not be predicted without reference to multiple factors that have not previously been measured in concert. |
