Measuring counterargumentation to fight fake news in secondary school pre-service teachers and students
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21490637 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Mercè Garcia-Milà (0000-0001-7628-7552, Universitat Autonòma de Barcelona, corresponding author), Núria Castells (0000-0002-4784-9672, Universitat Autonòma de Barcelona), Marta Minguela (0000-0001-6216-253X, Universitat Autonòma de Barcelona), Esther Pérez-Sedano (0000-0002-2577-717X, Universitat Autonòma de Barcelona), Elisabet Galindo (0009-0008-4611-8684, Universitat Autonòma de Barcelona) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Volume | 41 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Publication date | 2026-06-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | European Journal of Psychology of Education (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0256-2928 • E-ISSN: 1878-5174 |
| Publisher | Springer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s10212-026-01083-4 |
| OpenAlex | W7147221339 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 37 |
The easily accessible anonymous misinformation in social networks makes critical thinking vital to identify weak evidence, fallacies, or misleading sources. To assess the credibility of information, reading comprehension seems to be key, together with the argumentative capacity. To argue well, we need dual-function argumentation, that is, arguing in support of the favored option and counterarguing against it. This study aimed to analyze secondary school students and pre-service teachers’ dual-function argumentation—the practice of presenting and reasoning through both sides of an argument, measured through the quality of their justification of the credibility of a fake news item. It also aimed to explore the relation between the participants’ credibility, their reading comprehension, and the quality of their argumentation. The quality of dual-function argumentation was low in both samples. Only 16% of the students included a counterargument in their texts and none of them included a rebuttal. Thirty percent of the pre-service teachers included a counterargument, but just 6% included a rebuttal. Furthermore, the less the students believed the news, the better their argumentative competence, whereas this relation was not found in pre-service teachers. Finally, reading comprehension played a role in both credibility and quality of argumentation. Training on how to manage fake news is specially needed among our future teachers to enhance students’ argumentative capacities to address misinformation
Argumentation theory · Argumentative · Credibility · Misinformation · Reading comprehension · Education and Critical Thinking Development · Educational Strategies and Epistemologies · Misinformation and Its Impacts
The Skills of Argument
The Psychology of Fake News
Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory
A review of educational responses to the “post-truth” condition
Confirmation Bias
Adolescents’ reasoning to manage fake news
Preservice teachers’ recognition of source and content bias in educational application (app) reviews
Pre-service teachers’ knowledge, beliefs and predispositions to teach argumentation in their disciplines
Investigating structural relationships among upper‐secondary school students' beliefs about knowledge, justification for knowing, and Internet‐specific justification in the domain of science
Critical Thinking as Discourse
Epistemic Vigilance
Teaching media in a ‘post-truth’ age
Improving Questioning–Answering Strategies in Learning from Multiple Complementary Texts
How Well Can Students Evaluate Online Science Information? Contributions of Prior Knowledge, Gender, Socioeconomic Status, and Offline Reading Ability
Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs (2006)
| Highly cited | No |
|---|