Ackoff, R. L. (1967). Management misinformation systems. Management Sciences, 14(4), 147–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alexander, R. J. (2006). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk. York: Dialogos.Google Scholar

Allen, V. (1965). Situational factors in conformity. In Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 133–175). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Allen, V. (1976). Children as teachers: Theory and research on tutoring. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Allport, G. W., & Postman, L. J. (1945). The basic psychology of rumor. Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences, 8(Series III), 61–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Alper, S., Tjosvold, D., & Law, K. S. (1998). Interdependence and controversy in group decision making: Antecedents to effective self-managing teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 74(1), 33–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar

Ames, G., & Murray, F. (1982). When two wrongs make a right: Promoting cognitive change by social conflict. Developmental Psychology, 18(6), 892–895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Amigues, R. (1988). Peer interaction in solving physics problems: Sociocognitive confrontation and metacognitive aspects. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 45, 141–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anderson, N., & Graesser, C. (1976). An information integration analysis of attitude change in group discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 210–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anderson, R. C., Chinn, C., Waggoner, M., & Nguyen, K. (1998). Intellectually-stimulating story discussions. In Osborn, J. & Lehr, F. (Eds.), Literacy for all: Issues in teaching and learning (pp. 170–186). New York: Guildford Press.Google Scholar

Anderson, R. C., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., McNurlen, B., Archodidou, A., Kim, S., Reznitskaya, A., Tillmans, M., & Gilbert, L. (2001). The snowball phenomenon: Spread of ways of talking and ways of thinking across groups of children. Cognition and Instruction, 19, 1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Annis, L. (1983). The processes and effects of peer tutoring. Human Learning, 2, 39–47.Google Scholar

Asch, S. (1952). Social psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Asch, S. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70(9), Whole No. 416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Asterhan, C. S., & Schwarz, B. B. (2007). The effects of monological and dialogical argumentation on concept learning in evolutionary theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 626–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Atsumi, T., & Burnstein, E. (1992). Is minority influence different from majority influence?Brussels Congress, University of Michigan, Abstract number IN064.1.Google Scholar

Avery, P., Freeman, C., Greenwalt, K., & Trout, M. (2006). The “deliberating in a democracy project.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA, April 10.

Azmitia, M., & Montgomery, R. (1993). Friendship, transactive dialogues and the development of scientific reasoning. Social Development, 2, 202–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bahn, C. (1964). The interaction of creativity and social facilitation in creative problem solving. Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University. Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms, 65–7499.

Baker, S., & Petty, R. (1994). Majority and minority influence: Source-position imbalance as determinant of message scrutiny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bargh, J. A., & Schul, Y. (1980). On the cognitive benefits of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 593–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barnes, D., & Todd, F. (1977). Communication and learning in small groups. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Barnes, D., & Todd, F. (1995). Communication and learning revisited. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.Google Scholar

Baron, J. (1995). Myside bias in thinking about abortion. Thinking and Reasoning, 1, 221–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baron, J. (2008). Thinking and deciding (th edn.). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Beach, L. R. (1974). Self-directed student groups and college learning. Higher Education, 3, 187–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beer, M., & Eisenstat, R. A. (2000). The silent killers of strategy implementation and learning. Sloan Management Review (Summer), 29–40.

Beilin, H. (1977). Inducing conservation through training. In Steiner, G. (Ed.), Psychology of the 20th century, Piaget and beyond (Vol. 7, pp. 260–289). Zurich: Kindler.Google Scholar

Bennett, N., & Cass, A. (1989). The effects of group composition on group interactive processes and pupil understanding. British Educational Research Journal, 15, 119–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bennis, W., & Biederman, P. W. (1996). Organizing genius: The secrets of creative collaboration. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.Google Scholar

Benware, C. (1975). Quantitative and qualitative learning differences as a function of learning in order to teach another. Unpublished manuscript, University of Rochester. Cited in Deci, E., Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar

Bergquist, W., & Heikkinen, H. (1990). Student ideas regarding chemical equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 67, 1000–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berkowitz, M., & Gibbs, J. (1983). Measuring the developmental features of moral discussion. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 29, 399–410.Google Scholar

Berkowitz, M., Gibbs, J., & Broughton, J. (1980). The relation of moral judgment stage disparity to developmental effects of peer dialogues. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 26, 341–357.Google Scholar

Berlyne, D. (1957). Uncertainty and conflict: A point of contact between information theory and behavior theory concepts. Psychological Review, 64, 329–339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Berlyne, D. (1960). Conflict, arousal and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berlyne, D. (1965). Structure and direction in thinking. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar

Berlyne, D. (1966). Notes on intrinsic motivation and intrinsic reward in relation to instruction. In Bruner, J. (Ed.), Learning about learning (Cooperative Research Monograph No. 15). Washington, DC: US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education.Google Scholar

Blatchford, P., & Kutnick, P. (2003). Developing groupwork in everyday classrooms. Special issue of the International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 1–2.Google Scholar

Blatt, M. (1969). The effects of classroom discussion upon children's level of moral judgment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago.

Blatt, M., & Kohlberg, L. (1973). The effects of classroom moral discussion upon children's level of moral judgment. In Kohlberg, L. (Ed.), Collected papers on moral development and moral education. Harvard University: Moral Education and Research Foundation.Google Scholar

Blaye, A. (1990). Peer interaction in solving a binary matrix problem: Possible mechanisms causing individual progress. Learning and Instruction, 2, 45–56.Google Scholar

Bolen, L., & Torrance, E. (1976). An experimental study of the influence of locus of control, dyadic interaction, and sex on creative thinking. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, April.

Borys, S., & Spitz, H. (1979). Effect of peer interaction on the problem-solving behavior of mentally retarded youths. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 84, 273–279.Google ScholarPubMed

Botvin, G., & Murray, F. (1975). The efficacy of peer modeling and social conflict in the acquisition of conversation. Child Development, 45, 796–799.Google Scholar

Boulding, E. (1964). Further reflections on conflict management. In Kahn, R. & Boulding, E. (Eds.), Power and conflict in organizations (pp. 146–150). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Brehm, S. S., & Brehm, J. W. (1981). Psychological reactance: A theory of freedom and control. New York: Academic.Google Scholar

Brock, T. C., & Balloun, J. L. (1967). Behavioral receptivity to dissonant information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 413–428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Brown, R. A. J., & Renshaw, O. D. (2000). Collective argumentation: A sociocultural approach to reframing classroom teaching and learning. In Cowie, H. & van der Aalsvoort, G. (Eds.), Social interaction in learning and instruction: The meaning of discourse for the construction of knowledge (pp. 52–66). New York, NY: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar

Bruner, J., & Minturn, A. (1955). Perceptual identification and perceptual organization. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 53, 21–28.Google Scholar

Buchs, C., & Butera, F. (2004). Socio-cognitive conflict and the role of student interaction in learning. New Review of Social Psychology, 3, 80–87.Google Scholar

Buchs, C., Butera, F., & Mugny, G. (2004). Resource interdependence, student interactions, and performance in cooperative learning. Educational Psychology, 24(3) 291–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Burdick, H., & Burnes, A. (1958). A test of “strain toward symmetry” theories. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 57, 367–369.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Burke, E. (1790). Reflections on the French revolution (p. 144). Pearson Longman, 2006.Google Scholar

Butera, F., & Buchs, C. (2005). Reasoning together: From focusing to decentering. In Girotto, V. & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (Eds.), The shape of reason (pp. 193–203). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Butera, F., Huguet, P., Mugny, G., & Prez, J. A. (1994). Socio-epistemic conflict and constructivism. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 53, 229–239.Google Scholar

Butera, F., & Mugny, G. (1992). Influence minoritaire et falsification [Minority influence and falsification]. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 5, 115–132.Google Scholar

Butera, F., & Mugny, G. (1995). Conflict between incompetences and influence of a low-competence source in hypothesis testing. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 457–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Butera, F., & Mugny, G. (2001). Conflicts and social influences in hypothesis testing. In De Dreu, C. K. W. & De Vries, N. K. (Eds.), Group consensus and minority influence implications for innovation (pp. 160–192). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Butera, F., Mugny, G., & Buchs, C. (2001). Representation of knowledge as a mediator of learning. In Butera, F. & Mugny, G. (Eds.), Social influence in social reality (pp. 160–182). Seattle, Bern: Hopefe & Huber.Google Scholar

Butera, F., Mugny, G., Legrenzi, P., & Perez, J. A. (1996). Majority and minority influence, task representation, and inductive reasoning. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 123–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Butera, F., Mugny, G., & Tomei, A. (2000). Incertitude et enjeux identitaires dans l'influence sociale. In Beauvois, J. L., Joule, R. V., & Moneil, J. M. (Eds.), Perspectives cognitives et conduits sociales (Vol. 7, pp. 205–229). Rennes: Presses Universitaires.Google Scholar

Byrnes, D. S. (1998). Complexity theory and the socal sciences. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Carugati, F., De Paolis, P., & Mugny, G. (1980–1981). Conflit de centrations et progr's cognitive, III: regulations cognitive et relationnelles du conflit socio-cognitif. Bulletin de Psychologie, 34, 843–851.Google Scholar

Chen, G., Liu, C. H., & Tjosvold, D. (2005). Conflict management for effective top management teams and innovation in China. Journal of Management Studies, 42, 277–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chen, G., & Tjosvold, D. (2002). Conflict management and team effectiveness in China: The mediating role of justice. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19, 557–572.Google Scholar

Chen, Y. F., & Tjosvold, D. (2006). Participative leadership by American and Chinese managers in China: The role of relationships. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 1727–1752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chen, Y. F., & Tjosvold, D. (2007). Guanxi and leader member relationships between American managers and Chinese employees: Open-minded dialogue as mediator. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 24, 171–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chen, Y. F., Tjosvold, D., & Su, F. (2005). Goal interdependence for working across cultural boundaries: Chinese employees with foreign managers. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29, 429–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chen, Y. F., Tjosvold, D., & Wu, P. G. (2008). Foreign managers’ guanxi with Chinese employees: Effects of warm-heartedness and reward distribution on negotiation. Group Decision and Negotiation, 17, 79–96.Google Scholar

Chinn, C. A. (2006). Learning to argue. In O'Donnell, A. M., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Erkens, G. (Eds.), Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology (pp. 355–383). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Chinn, C. A., & Anderson, R. C. (1998). The structure of discussions that promote reasoning. Teachers College Record, 100, 315–368.Google Scholar

Chinn, C. A., O'Donnell, A. M., & Jinks, T. S. (2000). The structure of discourse in collaborative learning. The Journal of Experimental Education, 69, 77–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chiu, M. M. (1997). Building on diversity (ERIC Documentation Reproduction Service No. ED 410 325). Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar

Chiu, M. M. (2008). Effects of argumentation on group micro-creativity: Statistical discourse analyses of algebra students’ collaborative problem solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 382–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chiu, M. M., & Khoo, L. (2003). Rudeness and status effects during group problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 506–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Coleman, E. B., Brown, A. L., & Rivkin, I. D. (1997). The effect of instructional explanations on learning from scientific texts. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 347–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Collins, J. C., & Porras, J. I. (1994). Built to last: Successful habits of visionary companies. New York: Harper Collins Publisher.Google Scholar

Colson, W. (1968). Self-disclosure as a function of social approval. Unpublished masters thesis. Howard University, Washington, DC.

Cook, H., & Murray, F. (1973). Acquisition of conservation through the observation of conserving models. Paper presented at the meetings of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, March.

Cooper, P. (1995). Cubism (p. 14). London: Phaidon.Google Scholar

Coovert, M. D., & Reeder, G. D. (1990). Negativity effects in impression formation: The role of unit formation and schematic expectations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26(1), 49–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cosier, R. A., & Dalton, D. R. (1990). Positive effects of conflict: A field assessment. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1(1), 81–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Covington, M. (1984). The motive for self-worth. In Ames, R. & Ames, C. (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Vol. 1. Student motivation (pp. 17–113). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Covington, M. (1992). Making the grade: A self-worth perspective on motivation and school reform. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crockenberg, S., & Nicolayev, J. (1977). Stage transition on moral reasoning as related to conflict experienced in naturalistic settings. Paper presented at the Society for Research in Child Development. New Orleans, March.

Dalton, D. R., & Cosier, R. A. (1989). Development and psychometric properties of the decision conflict and cooperation questionnaire (DCCQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 697–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dalton, R. (2007). The good citizen: How a younger generation is reshaping American politics. Washington, DC: CQ Press, A Division of SAGE Publications.Google Scholar

Damon, W., & Killen, M. (1982). Peer interaction and the process of change in children's moral reasoning. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 28, 347–367.Google Scholar

Damon, W., & Phelps, E. (1988). Strategic uses of peer learning in children's education. In Berndt, T. J. & Ladd, G. W. (Eds.), Peer relations in child development (pp. 135–157). New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar

Darnon, C., Doll, S., & Butera, F. (2007). Dealing with a disagreeing partner: Relational and epistemic conflict elaboration. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22, 227–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Darwin, C. (1874). The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. New York: Rand, McNally.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dearborn, C., & Simon, H. (1958). Selective perception: A note on the departmental identification of executives. Sociometry, 23, 667–673.Google Scholar

De Dreu, C. K. W., & De Vries, N. K. (Eds.). (1996). Group consensus and minority influence: Implications for innovation (pp. 161–182). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

De Dreu, C. K. W., & Nauta, A. (2009). Self-interest and other-orientation in organizational behavior: Implications for job performance, prosocial behavior, and personal initiative. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 913–926.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

De Dreu, C. K. W., Weingart, L. R., & Kwon, S. (2000). Influence of social motives on integrative negotiation: A meta-analytic review and test of two theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 889–905.Google Scholar

De Dreu, C. K. W., & West, M. A. (2001). Minority dissent and team innovation: The importance of participation in decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1191–1201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Dekkers, P. J. J. M., & Thijs, G. D. (1998). Making productive use of students’ initial conceptions in developing the concept of force. Science Education, 82(1), 31–52.3.0.CO;2-1>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

De La Paz, S. (2005). Effects of historical reasoning instruction and writing strategy mastery in culturally and academically diverse middle school classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 139–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Delgado, M. R., Locke, H. M., Strenger, V. A., & Fiez, J. A. (2003). Dorsal striatum responses to reward and punishment: Effects of valence and magnitude manipulations. Cognitive, Affective, Behavioral Neuroscience, 3(1), 27–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Delgado, M. R., Nystrom, L. E., Fissell, C., Noll, D. C., & Fiez, N. A. (2000). Tracking the hemodynamic responses to reward and punishment in the striatum. Journal of Neurophysiology, 84(6), 3072–3077.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Delgado, M. R., Schotter, A., Ozbay, E. Y., & Phelps, E. A. (2008). Understanding overbidding: Using the neural circuitry of reward to design economic auctions. Science, 321, 1849–1852.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

De Lisi, R., & Goldbeck, S. L. (1999). Implications of Piaget's theory for peer learning. In O'Donnell, A. M. & King, A. (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 179–196). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Delli Carpini, M. X., Cook, F. L., & Jacobs, L. R. (2004). Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: A review of the empirical literature. Annual Review of Political Science, 7, 315–344.Google Scholar

de Montesquieu, C. (1748). The spirit of laws. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1989.Google Scholar

de Quervain, D. J. F., Fischbacher, U., Treyer, V., Schellhammer, M., Schnyder, U., Buck, A., & Fehr, E. (2004). The neural basis of altruistic punishment. Science, 305(5688), 1254–1258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Detert, J. R., & Trevino, L. K. (2010). Speaking up to higher ups: How supervisors and skip-level leaders influence employee voice. Organization Science, 21(1), 249–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

de Tocqueville, A. (1945). Democracy in America. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar

Deutsch, M. (1949). A theory of cooperation and competition. Human Relations, 2, 129–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Deutsch, M. (1962). Cooperation and trust: Some theoretical notes. In Jones, M. (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 275–320). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar

Deutsch, M. (1969). Conflicts: Productive and destructive. Journal of Social Issues, 25(1), 7–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. New York: D. C. Health & Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Doise, W., & Mugny, G. (1975). Recherches sociogénétiques sur la coordination d'actions interd pendants. Revue Suisse de Psychologie Pure et Appliqu e, 34, 160–174.Google Scholar

Doise, W., & Mugny, G. (1979). Individual and collective conflicts of centrations in cognitive development. European Journal of Psychology, 9, 105–198.Google Scholar

Doise, W., & Mugny, G. (1984). The social development of the intellect. Oxford, England: Pergammon.Google Scholar

Doise, W., Mugny, G., & Perret-Clermont, A. N. (1975). Social interaction and the development of cognitive operations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 367–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Doise, W., Mugny, G., & Perret-Clermont, A. (1976). Social interaction and cognitive development: Further evidence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 6, 245–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Doise, W., Mugny, G., & Perez, J. A. (1998). The social construction of knowledge: Social marking and socio cognitive conflict. In Flick, U. (Ed.), The psychology of the social (pp. 77–90). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Doise, W., & Palmonari, A. (1984). Social interaction in individual development (pp. 127–146). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Dreyfus, A., Jungwirth, E., & Eliovitch, R. (1990). Applying the ‘‘cognitive conflict” strategy for conceptual change: Some implications, difficulties, and problems. Science Education, 74, 555–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287–312.3.0.CO;2-A>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Duckitt, J. (1992). The social psychology of prejudice. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar

Dunn, J., & Kendrick, C. (1982). Siblings: Love, envy and understanding. London: Grant McIntyre.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dunnette, M., Campbell, J., & Jaastad, K. (1963). The effect of group participation on brainstorming effectiveness of two industrial samples. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47, 30–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dunning, D., & Ross, L. (1988). Overconfidence in individual and group prediction: Is the collective any wiser? Unpublished manuscript, Cornell University.Google Scholar

Duschl, R. A. (2007). Quality argumentation and epistemic criteria. In Erduran, S. & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 159–175). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar

Ehrich, D., Guttman, I., Schonbach, P., & Mills, J. (1957). Post-decision exposure to relevant information. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 54, 98–102.Google Scholar

Ehrlich, H. J., & Lee, D. (1969). Dogmatism, learning, and resistance to change: A review and a new paradigm. Psychological Bulletin, 71, 249–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Eisenberg, A. R., & Garvey, C. (1981). Children's use of verbal strategies in resolving conflicts. Discourse Processes, 4, 149–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Elizabeth, L. L., & Galloway, D. (1996). Conceptual links between cognitive acceleration through science education and motivational style: A critique of Adey and Shayer. International Journal of Science Education, 18, 35–49.Google Scholar

Elsbach, K. D., & Hargadon, A. B. (2006). Enhancing creativity through “mindless” work: A framework of workday design. Organizational Science, 17(4), 470–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ennis, R. H. (1993). Critical thinking assessment. Theory into Practice, 32, 179–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Erb, H-P., Bohner, G., Rank, S., & Einwiller, S. (2002). Processing minority and majority communications: The role of conflict with prior attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1172–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Etherington, L., & Tjosvold, D. (1998). Managing budget conflicts: Contribution of goal interdependence and interaction. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 15(2), 1–10.Google Scholar

Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis. Boston: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar

Falk, D., & Johnson, D. W. (1977). The effects of perspective-taking and ego-centrism on problem solving in heterogeneous and homogeneous groups. Journal of Social Psychology, 102, 63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Feffer, M., & Suchotliff, L. (1966). Decentering implications of social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 415–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fehr, E., & Camerer, C. F. (2007). Social neuroeconomics: The neural circuitry of social preferences. Trends in Cognitive Science, 11(10), 419–427.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Felton, M. K. (2004). The development of discourse strategies in adolescent argumentation. Cognitive Development, 19, 35–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Felton, M. K., & Kuhn, D. (2001). The development of argumentative discourse skill. Discourse Processes, 32, 135–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ferretti, R. P., Andrews-Weckerly, S., & Lewis, W. E. (2007). Improving the argumentative writing of students with learning disabilities: Descriptive and normative considerations. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 23, 267–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ferretti, R. P., Lewis, W. E., & Andrews-Weckerly, S. (2009). Do goals affect the structure of students’ argumentative writing strategies?Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 577–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Festinger, L. (1957). Cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.Google Scholar

Festinger, L., & Maccoby, N. (1964). On resistance to persuasive communications. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 68, 359–366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Fisher, E. (1993). Distinctive features of pupil–pupil talk and their relationship to learning. Language and Education, 7, 239–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fisher, P., Jonas, E., Frey, D., & Schultz-Hardt, S. (2005). Selective exposure to information: The impact of information limits. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 469–492.Google Scholar

Fisher, R. (1969). An each one teach one approach to music notation. Grade Teacher, 86, 120.Google Scholar

Fiske, S. T. (1980). Attention and weight in person perception: The impact of negative and extreme behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(6), 889–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Flavell, J. (1963). The developmental psychology of Jean Piaget. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Flavell, J. (1968). The development of role-taking and communication skills in children. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Foley, J., & MacMillan, F. (1943). Mediated generalization and the interpretation of verbal behavior: V. Free association as related to differences in professional training. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33, 299–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Foucault, M. (1970). The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar

Freedman, J. L., & Sears, D. O. (1963). Voters’ preferences among types of information. American Psychologist, 18, 375.Google Scholar

Freedman, J. L., & Sears, D. O. (1965). Selective exposure. In Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 57–97). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Freedman, J. L., & Sears, D. O. (1967). Selective exposure to information: A critical review. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 31(2), 194–213.Google Scholar

Freese, M., & Fay, D. (2001). Personal initiative (PI): An active performance concept for work in the 21st century. Research in Organizational Behavior, 23, 133–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Freud, S. (1930). Civilization and its discontents. In Strachey, J. (Ed.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 21, pp. 86–145). London: Hogart Press, 1961.Google Scholar

Frey, D. (1981). Reversible and irreversible decisions: Preference for consonant information as a function of attractiveness of decision alternatives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 7, 621–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Frey, D. (1986). Recent research on selective exposure to information. In Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 41–80). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Frey, D., & Rosch, M. (1984). Information seeking after decisions: The roles of novelty of information and decision reversibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10, 91–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Frey, D., & Wicklund, R. A. (1978). A clarification of selective exposure: The impact of choice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 132–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Galinsky, A. D., Maddux, W. W., Gilin, D., & White, J. B. (2008). Why it pays to get inside the head of your opponent: The differential effects of perspective taking and empathy in negotiations. Psychological Science, 19(1), 378–384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Galton, M., Hargreaves, L., Comber, C., Wall, D., & Pell, A. (1999). Inside the primary classroom: 20 years on. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Galton, M., Simon, B., & Croll, P. (1980). Inside the primary classroom (the ORACLE project). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Garcia-Marques, T., & Mackie, D. (2001). The feeling of familiarity as a regulator of persuasive processing. Social Cognition, 19, 9–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gartner, A., Kohler, M., & Reissman, F. (1971). Children teach children: Learning by teaching. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar

Gelman, R. (1978). Cognitive development. Annual Review of Psychology, 29, 297–332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Genishi, C., & Di Paolo, M. (1982). Learning through agreement in a pre-school. In Wilkinson, L. (Ed.), Communicating in the classroom (pp. 49–67). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Gerard, H., & Greenbaum, C. (1962). Attitudes toward an agent of uncertainty reduction. Journal of Personality, 30, 485–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gibbons, F. X. (1986). Social comparison and depression: Company's effect on misery. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 140–148.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gilbert, L. (1997). Why women do and do not access street-based services. Drugs News, 17, 30–34.Google Scholar

Gilly, M., & Roux, P. (1984). Efficacite compare du travail individual et du travail en interaction socio-cognitive dans l'appropriation et al mise en oeuvre de regles de resolution chez les enfants de 11–12 ans. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 4, 171–188.Google Scholar

Glachan, M., & Light, P. (1982). Peer interaction and learning: Can two wrongs make a right? In Butterworth, G. & Light, P. (Eds.), Social cognition: Studies of the development of understanding (pp. 238–262). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Glidewell, J. (1953). Group emotionality and production. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago.

Golanics, J. D., & Nussbaum, E. M. (2008). Enhancing collaborative online argumentation through question elaboration and goal instructions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 167–180.Google Scholar

Graham, D. (2006). Strategy instruction and the teaching of writing: A meta-analysis. In MacArthur, C. A., Graham, S., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 187–207). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Grant, A. M., & Berry, J. W. (2011). The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective-taking, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 73–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Greenwald, A., & Albert, R. (1968). Acceptance and recall of improvised arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 31–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Griffith, E., Plamenatz, J., & Pennock, J. (1956). Cultural prerequisites to a successfully functioning democracy: A symposium. American Political Science Review, 50, 101–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gruber, H. E. (2006). Creativity and conflict resolution: The role of point of view. In Deutsch, M. & Coleman, P. T. (Eds.), The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice (pp. 391–401). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.Google Scholar

Gruenfeld, D. H. (1995). Status, ideology and integrative complexity on the U.S. Supreme Court: Rethinking the politics of political decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 5–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5(9), 444–454.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Guilford, J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 33, 267–293.Google Scholar

Guttman, A. (2000). Why should schools care about civic education? In McDonnell, L., Timpane, P., & Benjamin, R. (Eds.), Rediscovering the democratic purposes of education (pp. 73–90). Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar

Hackman, J. R., Brousseau, K. R., & Weiss, J. A. (1976). The interaction of task design and group performance: Strategies in determining group effectiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 350–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hagler, D. A., & Brem, S. K. (2008). Reaching agreement: The structure & pragmatics of critical care nurses’ informal reasoning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 403–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hall, J., & Williams, M. (1966). A comparison of decision-making performance in established ad hoc groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 214–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hall, J., & Williams, M. (1970). Group dynamics training and improved decision making. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 6, 39–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hammond, K. (1965). New directions in research on conflict resolution. Journal of Social Issues, 11, 44–66.Google Scholar

Hardin, C. D., & Higgins, E. T. (1996). Shared reality: How social verification makes the subjective objective. In Sorrentino, R. M. & Higgins, E. T. (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition. Vol. 3. The interpersonal context (pp. 28–84). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar

Hartup, W. W., French, D. C., Laursen, B., Johnston, M. K., & Ogawa, J. R. (1993). Conflict and friendship relations in middle childhood: Behaviour in a closed-field situation. Child Development, 64, 445–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heller, P., Keith, R., & Anderson, S. (1992). Teaching problem solving through co-operative grouping. Part 1: Group versus individual problem solving. American Journal of Physics, 60, 627–636.Google Scholar

Helson, R. (1996). Arnheim Award address to division 10 of the American Psychological Association: In search of the creative personality. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 295–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hewstone, M., & Martin, R. (2008). Social influence. In Hewstone, M., Stroebe, W., & Jonas, K. (Eds.), Introduction to social psychology (th edn., pp. 216–243). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar

Hidi, S., Berndorff, D., & Ainley, M. (2002). Children's argument writing, interest and self-efficacy: An intervention. Learning and Instruction, 12, 429–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hoffman, L., Harburg, E., & Maier, N. (1962). Differences in disagreements as factors in creative problem solving. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 64, 206–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hoffman, L., & Maier, N. (1961). Sex differences, sex composition, and group problem solving. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 453–456.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hogan, R., & Henley, N. (1970). A test of the empathy-effective communication hypothesis. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Social Organization of Schools, Report #84.Google Scholar

Hovey, D., Gruber, H., & Terrell, G. (1963). Effects of self-directed study on course achievement, retention, and curiosity. The Journal of Educational Research, 56(7), 346–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hovhannisyan, A., Varrella, G., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (2005). Cooperative learning and building democracies. The Cooperative Link, 20(1), 1–3.Google Scholar

Howe, C. J. (2006). Group interaction and conceptual understanding in science: Coconstruction, contradiction and the mechanisms of growth. Paper presented at Annual Conference of British Psychological Society Developmental Section. Royal Holloway College, London.

Howe, C. J., & McWilliam, D. (2001). Peer argument in educational settings: Variations due to socioeconomic status, gender and activity context. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 20, 61–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Howe, C. J., & McWilliam, D. (2006). Opposition in social interaction between children: Why intellectual benefits do not mean social costs. Social Development, 15(2), 205–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Howe, C. J., McWilliam, D., & Cross, G. (2005). Chance favours only the prepared mind: Incubation and the delayed effects of peer collaboration. British Journal of Psychology, 96, 67–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Howe, C. J., Rodgers, C., & Tolmie, A. (1990). Physics in the primary school: Peer interaction and the understanding of floating and sinking. European Journal of Psychology of Education, V, 459–475.Google Scholar

Howe, C. J., Tolmie, A., Anderson, A., & MacKenzie, M. (1992). Conceptual knowledge in physics: The role of group interaction in computer-supported teaching. Learning and Instruction, 2, 161–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Howe, C. J., Tolmie, A., Greer, K., & Mackenzie, M. (1995). Peer collaboration and conceptual growth in physics: task influences on children's understanding of heating and cooling. Cognition and Instruction, 13(4), 483–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Howe, C. J., Tolmie, A., & Mackenzie, M. (1995a). Computer support for the collaborative learning of physics concepts. In O'Malley, C. E. (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative learning (pp. 223–243). London: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar

Howe, C. J., Tolmie, A., & Rogers, C. (1992). The acquisition of conceptual knowledge in science by primary school children: Group interacting and the understanding of motion down an incline. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 10, 113–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Howe, C., Tolmie, A., Thurston, A., Topping, K., Christie, D., Livingston, K., Jessiman, E., & Donaldson, C. (2007). Group work in elementary science: Towards organisational principles for supporting pupil learning. Learning and Instruction, 17, 549–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hui, C., Wong, A. S. H., & Tjosvold, D. (2007). Turnover intention and performance in China: The role of positive affectivity, perceived organizational support and constructive controversy. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80(4), 735–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hunt, J. (1964). Introduction: Revisiting montessori. In Montessori, M. (Ed.), The Montessori method (pp. xi–xxxv). New York: Shocken Books.Google Scholar

Inagaki, K. (1981). Facilitation of knowledge integration through classroom discussion. Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition, 3, 26–28.Google Scholar

Inagaki, K., & Hatano, G. (1968). Motivational influences on epistemic observation. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 16, 221–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Inagaki, K., & Hatano, G. (1977). Application of cognitive motivation and its effects on epistemic observation. American Educational Research Journal, 14, 485–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Inhelder, B., & Sinclair, H. (1969). Learning cognitive structures. In Mussen, P. H., Langer, J., & Covington, M. (Eds.), Trends and issues on developmental psychology (pp. 2–21). New York:Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar

Iverson, M. A., & Schwab, H. G. (1967). Ethnocentric dogmatism and binocular fusion of sexually and racially discrepant stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7(1), 73–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Janis, I. L. (1971). Groupthink. Psychology Today, 5(6), 308–317.Google Scholar

Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes. Oxford: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar

Janis, I. L., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making. New York: Free Press.Google ScholarPubMed

Jaworski, A., & Coupland, N. (1999). The discourse reader. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Jefferson, T. (1815). Letter to Monroe, Colonel James. In Randolph, T. J. (Ed.), The papers of Jefferson, Thomas. From the Memoirs, Correspondence, and Miscellanies, from the Papers of Thomas Jefferson. A Linked Index to the Project Gutenberg Editions.

Jetten, J., Hornsey, M. J., Spears, R., Haslam, S. A., & Cowell, E. (2010). Rule transgressions in groups: The conditional nature of newcomers’ willingness to confront deviance. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40(2), 338–348.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W. (1970). Social psychology of education. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W. (1971). Role reversal: A summary and review of the research, International Journal of Group Tensions, 1, 318–334.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W. (1974). Communication and the inducement of cooperative behavior in conflicts: A critical review. Speech Monographs, 41, 64–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, D. W. (1975a). Cooperativeness and social perspective taking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 241–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, D. W. (1975b). Affective perspective-taking and cooperative predisposition. Developmental Psychology, 11, 869–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, D. W. (1977). Distribution and exchange of information in problem-solving dyads. Communication Research, 4, 283–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, D. W. (1979). Educational psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W. (1980). Group processes: Influences of student-student interaction on school outcomes. In McMillan, J. (Ed.), The social psychology of school learning (pp. 123–168). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W. (1991). Human relations and your career. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W. (2003). Social interdependence: The interrelationships among theory, research, and practice. American Psychologist, 58(11), 931–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, D. W. (2014). Reaching out: Interpersonal effectiveness and self-actualization (th edn.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. (2013). Joining together: Group theory and group skills (th edn.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1974). Instructional goal structure: Cooperative, competitive, or individualistic. Review of Educational Research, 44, 213–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1979). Conflict in the classroom: Constructive controversy and learning. Review of Educational Research, 49, 51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1985). Classroom conflict: Controversy versus debate in learning groups. American Educational Research Journal, 22, 237–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1991). Critical thinking through structured controversy. In Cauley, K., Linder, F., & McMillan, J. (Eds.), Educational psychology 91/92 (pp. 126–130). Guilford, CT: The Gushkin Publishing Group.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2000a). Cooperative learning, values, and culturally plural classrooms. In Leicester, M., Modgill, C., & Modgill, S. (Eds.), Values, the classroom, and cultural diversity (pp. 15–28). London: Cassell PLC.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2000b). Civil political discourse in a democracy: The contribution of psychology. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 6(4), 291–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2002). Human relations: Valuing diversity (nd edn.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2003). Controversy and peace education. Journal of Research in Education, 13(1), 71–91.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2005a). Teaching students to be peacemakers (th edn.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2005b). New developments in social interdependence theory. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 131(4), 285–358.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (Guest Editors). (2005c). Peace education. Theory Into Practice, 44(4), Fall Issue.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2007). Creative controversy: Intellectual challenge in the classroom (th edn.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009a). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009b). Energizing learning: The instructional power of conflict. Educational Researcher, 38(1), 37–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2010). Peace education in the classroom: Creating effective peace education programs. In Salomon, G. & Cairns, E. (Eds.), Handbook of peace education (pp. 223–240). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2014). Constructive controversy as a means of teaching citizens how to engage in political discourse. Policy Futures in Education, 12(3), 417–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. (2013). Cooperation in the classroom (th edn.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, F. (1976). Promoting constructive conflict in the classroom. Notre Dame Journal of Education, 7, 163–168.Google Scholar

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., Pierson, W., & Lyons, V. (1985). Controversy versus concurrence seeking in multi-grade and single-grade learning groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(9), 835–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Scott, L. (1978). The effects of cooperative and individualized instruction on student attitudes and achievement. Journal of Social Psychology, 104, 207–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Tiffany, M. (1984). Structuring academic conflicts between majority and minority students: Hindrance or help to integration. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 9, 61–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson, R., Brooker, C., Stutzman, J., Hultman, D., & Johnson, D. W. (1985). The effects of controversy, concurrence seeking, and individualistic learning on achievement and attitude change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, 197–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jones, E. E., & Aneshansel, J. (1956). The learning and utilization of contravaluent material. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 53, 27–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Judd, C. (1978). Cognitive effects of attitude conflict resolution. Conflict Resolution, 22, 483–498.Google Scholar

Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58, 697–720.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kalven, H., & Zeisel, H. (1966). The American jury. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar

Kang, M. J., Hsu, M., Krajbich, I. M., Loewenstein, G., McClure, S. M., Wang, J. T., & Camerer, C. F. (2009). The wick in the candle of learning: Epistemic curiosity activates reward circuitry and enhances memory. Psychological Science, 20(8), 963–973.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kaplan, M. (1977). Discussion polarization effects in a modern jury decision paradigm: Informational influences. Sociometry, 40, 262–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kaplan, M., & Miller, C. (1977). Judgments and group discussion: Effect of presentation and memory factors on polarization. Sociometry, 40, 337–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Keasey, C. (1973). Experimentally induced changes in moral opinions and reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 30–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Keefer, M. W., Zeitz, C. M., & Resnick, L. B. (2000). Judging the quality of peer-led student dialogues. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 53–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kennedy, K. A., & Pronin, E. (2008). When disagreement gets ugly: Perceptions of bias and the escalation of conflict. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(6), 833–848.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kim, I. H., Anderson, R., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., & Archodidou, A. (2007). Discourse patterns during children's online discussions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(3), 333–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

King-Casas, B., Tomlin, D., Anen, C., Camerer, C. F., Quartz, S. R., & Montague, P. R. (2005). Getting to know you: Reputation and trust in a two-person economic exchange. Science Magazine, 308(5718), 78–83.Google Scholar

Kirchmeyer, C., & Cohen, A. (1992). Multicultural groups. Their performance and reactions with constructive conflict. Group and Organization Management, 17(2), 153–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Klaczynski, P. (2000). Motivated scientific reasoning biases, epistemological beliefs, and theory polarization: A two-process approach to adolescent cognition. Child Development, 71, 1347–1366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Klaczynski, P. (2004). A dual process model of adolescent development: Implications for decision making, reasoning, and identity. In Kail, R. (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 31, pp. 73–123). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Kleinhesselink, R., & Edwards, R. (1975). Seeking and avoiding belief-discrepant information as a function of its perceived refutability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 787–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Knight-Arest, I., & Reid, D. K. (1978). Peer interaction as a catalyst for conservation acquisition in normal and learning-disabled children. Paper presented at the 8th Annual Symposium of the Jean Piaget Society, Philadelphia, May. ERIC Number: ED162489.

Knudson, R. (1992). Analysis of argumentative writing at two grade levels. Journal of Educational Research, 85, 169–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In Goslin, D. (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 347–480). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.Google Scholar

Kolbert, E. (2014). The sixth extinction. New York: Henry Holt.Google Scholar

Kropotkin, P. A. (1902). Mutual aid: A factor of evolution. London: William Heinemann.Google Scholar

Krueger, J. I. (2013). Social projection as a source of cooperation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 289–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kruger, A. C. (1992). The effect of peer- and adult-child transactive discussions on moral reasoning. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 38, 191–211.Google Scholar

Kruger, A. C. (1993). Peer collaboration: Conflict, co-operation or both?Social Development, 2, 165–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kruglanski, A. W. (1980). Lay epistemo-logic-process and contents: Another look at attribution theory. Psychological Review, 87(1), 70–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kuhn, D., Langer, J., Kohlberg, L., & Haan, N. S. (1977). The development of formal operations in logical and moral judgment. Genetic Psychological Monographs, 55, 97–188.Google Scholar

Kuhn, D., Shaw, V., & Felton, M. (1997). Effects of dyadic interaction on argumentive reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 287–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2003). The development of argument skill. Child Development, 74, 1245–1260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2007). Coordinating own and other perspectives in argument. Thinking and Reasoning, 13(2), 90–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kumpulainen, K., & Wray, D. (Eds.). (2002). Classroom interaction and social learning: From theory to practice. London: Routledge-Falmer.Google Scholar

Lampert, M. L., Rittenhouse, P., & Crumbaugh, C. (1996). Agreeing to disagree: Developing sociable mathematical discourse. In Olson, D. R. & Torrance, N. (Eds.), Handbook of human development in education (pp. 731–764). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Langer, E., Blank, A., & Chanowitz, B. (1978). The mindlessness of ostensibly thoughtful action: The role of “placebic” information in interpersonal interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 635–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Larson, J. R. Jr. (2007). Deep diversity and strong synergy. Small Group Research, 38, 413–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Larson, J. R. Jr., Christiansen, C., Abbott, A. S., & Franz, T. M. (1996). Diagnosing groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 315–330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Laughlin, P. (1980). Social combination processes of cooperative problem-solving groups on verbal intellective tasks. In Fishbein, M. (Ed.), Progress in social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 127–155). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Laughlin, P., & Adamopoulos, J. (1980). Social combination processes and individual learning for six-person cooperative groups on an intellective task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 941–947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

LeFurgy, W., & Woloshin, G. (1969). Immediate and long-term effects of experimentally induced social influence in the modification of adolescents’ moral judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12, 104–110.Google Scholar

Legrenzi, P., Butera, F., Mugny, G., & Perez, J. A. (1991). Majority and minority influence in inductive reasoning: A preliminary study. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 359–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Levi, M., Torrance, E. P., & Pletts, G. O. (1955). Sociometric studies of combat air crews in survival training (Sociometry Monographs). New York: Beacon House.Google Scholar

Levine, J., & Murphy, G. (1943). The learning and forgetting of controversial material. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 38, 507–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Levine, R., Chein, I., & Murphy, G. (1942). The relation of a need to the amount of perceptual distortion: A preliminary report. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 13, 283–293.Google Scholar

Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts. New York: Harper.Google Scholar

Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers. New York: Harper.Google Scholar

Lewis, C. S. (2010). The chronicles of Narnia (Box Set). New York: Harper, Collins.Google Scholar

Leyens, J. P., Dardeene, B., Yzerbyt, V., Scaillet, N., & Snyder, M. (1999). Confirmation and disconfirmation: Their social advantages. In Stroebe, W. & Hewstone, M. (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 199–230). Chickester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar

Limon, M. (2001). On the cognitive conflict as an instructional strategy for conceptual change: A critical appraisal. Learning and Instruction, 11, 357–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Linn, M. C., & Elyon, B. S. (2000). Knowledge integration and displaced volume. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 9, 287–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lord, C., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2098–2109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lorenz, C. (1963). On aggression. New York: Hartcourt, Brace, and World.Google Scholar

Lovelace, K., Shapiro, D., & Weingart, L. R. (2001). Maximizing cross-functional new product team's innovativeness and constraint adherence: A conflict communications perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 779–793.Google Scholar

Lowin, A. (1967). Approach and avoidance: alternative modes of selective exposure to information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6(1), 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lowin, A. (1969). Further evidence for an approach-avoidance interpretation of selective exposure. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 5, 265–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lowry, N., & Johnson, D. W. (1981). Effects of controversy on epistemic curiosity, achievement, and attitudes. Journal of Social Psychology, 115, 31–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Luchins, A. (1942). Mechanization in problem solving: The effect of Einstellung. Psychological Monographs, 54(6), Whole No. 248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maass, A., & Clark, R. (1984). Hidden impact of minorities: Fifteen years of minority influence research. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 428–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mackie, D. M. (1987). Systematic and nonsystematic processing of majority and minority persuasive communications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maggi, J., Butera, F., Legrenzi, P., & Mugny, G. (1998). Relevance of information and social influence in the pseudodiagnosticity bias. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 57, 188–199.Google Scholar

Magnuson, E. (1986, March 10). A serious deficiency: The Rogers Commission faults NASA's flawed decision-making process. Time, pp. 40–42.

Maier, N. (1970). Problem solving and creativity in individuals and groups. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar

Maier, N., & Hoffman, L. (1964). Financial incentives and group decision in motivating change. Journal of Social Psychology, 64, 369–378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Maier, N., & Solem, A. (1952). The contributions of a discussion leader to the quality of group thinking: The effective use of minority opinions. Human Relations, 5, 277–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maier, N., & Thurber, J. (1969). Problems in delegation. Personnel Psychology, 22(2), 131–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maitland, K. A., & Goldman, J. R. (1974). Moral judgment as a function of peer group interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30(5), 699–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ma-Naim, C., Bar, V., & Zinn, B. (2002). Integrating microscopic macroscopic and energetic descriptions for a Conceptual Change in Thermodynamics. Paper presented in the third European Symposium, on Conceptual Change, June 26–28, Turku, Finland.

Martin, R., & Hewstone, M. (2003). Majority and minority influence: When, not whether, source status instigates heuristic or systematic processing. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 313–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Martin, R., Hewstone, M., & Martin, P. Y. (2007). Systematic and heuristic processing of majority and minority-endorsed messages: The effects of varying outcome relevance and levels of orientation on attitude and message processing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 43–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Maybin, J. (2006). Children's voices: Talk, knowledge and identity. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McClelland, D. C., & Atkinson, J. A. (1948). The projective expression of needs. I. The effect of different intensities of the hunger drive on perception. Journal of Psychology, 25, 205–222.Google Scholar

McKenzie, C. R. M. (2004). Hypothesis testing and evaluation. In Koehler, D. J. & Harvey, N. (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of judgment & decision making (pp. 200–219). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar

McLeod, P. L., Lobel, S. A., & Cox, T. H. Jr. (1996). Ethnic diversity and creativity in small groups. Small Group Research, 27(2), 248–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Means, M. L., & Voss, J. F. (1996). Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 139–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mendelberg, T. (2002). The deliberative citizen: Theory and evidence. Political Decision Making, Deliberation and Participation, 6, 151–193.Google Scholar

Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and learners. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children's thinking: A sociocultural approach. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Merton, R. K. (1957). Social theory and social structure. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Meyers, R. A., Brashers, D. E., & Hanner, J. (2000). Majority-minority influence: Identifying argumentative patterns and predicting argument-outcome links. Journal of Communication, 50, 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Miell, D., & MacDonald, R. (2000). Children's creative collaborations: The importance of friendship when working together on a musical composition. Social Development, 9, 348–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Miller, S., & Brownell, C. (1975). Peers, persuasion, and Piaget: Dyadic interaction between conservers and nonconservers. Child Development, 46, 992–997.Google Scholar

Milliken, F. J., Bartel, C. A., & Kurtzberg, T. R. (2003). Diversity and creativity in work groups. In Paulus, P. B. & Nijstad, B. A. (Eds.), Group creativity (pp. 32–62). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Mills, T. (1967). The sociology of small groups. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

Monteil, J. M., & Chambres, P. (1990). Eléments pour une exploration des dimensions du conflit socio-cognitif: Une expérimentation chez l'adulte [Elements for exploring socio-cognitive conflict: An experiment with adults]. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 3, 499–517.Google Scholar

Mosconi, G. (1990). Discorso e pensiero [Discourse and thinking]. Bologna, Italy: II Mulino.Google Scholar

Moscovici, S. (1980). Toward a theory of conversion behavior. In Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 209–239). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Moscovici, S. (1985a). Innovation and minority influence. In Moscovici, S., Mugny, G., & Van Avermaet, E. (Eds.), Perspectives on minority influence (pp. 9–52). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moscovici, S. (1985b). Social influence and conformity. In Lindzey, G. & Aronson, E. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology(edn., Vol. 2, pp. 347–412). New York: Random House.Google Scholar

Moscovici, S., & Faucheux, C. (1972). Social Influence, conforming bias, and the study of active minorities. In Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 13). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Moscovici, S., & Lage, E. (1976). Studies in social influence III: Majority versus minority influence in a group. European Journal of Social Psychology, 6, 149–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moscovici, S., Lage, E., & Naffrechoux, M. (1969). Influence of a consistent minority on the responses of a majority in a color perception task. Sociometry, 32, 365–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moscovici, S., & Nemeth, C. (1974). Social influence: II. Minority influence. Oxford, England: Rand McNally.Google Scholar

Mouffe, C. (2000). The democratic paradox. London: Verso.Google Scholar

Mucchi-Faina, A., & Cicoletti, G. (2006). Divergence vs. ambivalence: Effects of personal relevance on minority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(1), 91–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mugny, G. (1982). The power of minorities. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Mugny, G., Butera, F., Quiamzade, A., Dragulescu, A., & Tomei, A. (2003). Comparaisons sociales des compétences et dynamiques d'influence sociale dans les tâches d'aptitudes (social comparison of competencies and social influence). Année Psychologique, 103(3), 469–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mugny, G., De Paolis, P., & Carugati, F. (1984). Social regulation in cognitive development. In Doise, W. & Palmonari, A., Social interaction in individual development (pp. 127–146). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mugny, G., & Doise, W. (1978). Socio-cognitive conflict and structure of individual and collective performances. European Journal of Social Psychology, 8, 181–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mugny, G., Doise, W., & Perret-Clermont, A. N. (1975–1976). Conflit de centrations et progrès cognitif. Bulletin de Psychologie, 29, 199–204.Google Scholar

Mugny, G., Giroud, J. C., & Doise, W. (1978–1979). Conflit de centrations et progress cognitif. II: nouvelles illustrations experimentales. Bulletin de Psychologie, 32, 979–985.Google Scholar

Mugny, G., Levy, M., & Doise, W. (1978). Conflit socio-cognitif et developpement cognitif. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 37(1), 22–43.Google Scholar

Mugny, G., Perret-Clermont, A. N., & Doise, W. (1981). Interpersonal coordinations and sociological differences in the construction of the intellect. Progress in Applied Social Psychology, 1, 315–343.Google Scholar

Mugny, G., Tafani, E., Falomir, J. M., & Layat, C. (2000). Source credibility, social comparison and social influence. International Review of Social Psychology, 13, 151–175.Google Scholar

Murray, F. B. (1972). The acquisition of conservation through social interaction. Developmental Psychology, 6, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Murray, F. B. (1978). Development of intellect and reading. In Murray, F. & Pikulski, J. (Eds.), The acquisition of reading (pp. 55–60). Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar

Murray, F. B. (1981). The conservation paradigm: Conservation of conservation research. In Brodzinsky, D., Sigel, I., & Golinkoff, R. (Eds.), New directions in Piagetian theory and research (pp. 143–175). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Murray, F. B. (1982). Teaching through social conflict. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 7, 257–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Murray, F. B. (1983). Cognitive benefits of teaching on the teacher. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Montreal, Quebec.

Murray, F. B., Ames, G., & Botvin, G. (1977). Acquisition of conservation through cognitive dissonance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 519–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Murray, J. (1974). Social learning and cognitive development: Modeling effects on children's understanding of conservation. British Journal of Psychology, 65, 151–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mutz, D. C. (2002). The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation. American Journal of Political Science, 46(4), 838–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Narvaez, D., & Rest, J. (1995). The four components of acting morally. In Kurtines, W. & Gewirtz, J. (Eds.), Moral behavior and moral development: An introduction (pp. 385–400). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Nauta, A., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Van Der Vaart, T. (2002). Social value orientation, organizational goal concerns and interdepartmental problem-solving behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 199–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Neisser, U. (1954). On experimental distinction between perceptual process and verbal response. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 399–402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Nel, E., Helmreich, R., & Aronson, E. (1969). Opinion change in the advocate as a function of the persuasibility of his audience: A clarification of the meaning of dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12, 117–124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Nemeth, C. J. (1976). A comparison between conformity and minority influence. Paper presented to the International Congress of Psychology, Paris, France.

Nemeth, C. J. (1977). Interactions between jurors as a function of majority vs. unanimity decision rules. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 7, 38–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nemeth, C. J. (1986). Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93, 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nemeth, C. J. (1995). Dissent as driving cognition, attitudes and judgments. Social Cognition, 13, 273–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nemeth, C. J. (1997). Managing innovation: When less is more. California Management Review, 40, 59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nemeth, C. J., Brown, K., & Rogers, J. (2001). Devil's advocate versus authentic dissent: Stimulating quantity and quality. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(6), 707–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nemeth, C. J., & Chiles, C. (1988). Modeling courage: The role of dissent in fostering independence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 275–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nemeth, C. J., & Goncalo, J. A. (2005). Influence and persuasion in small groups. In Brock, T. C. & Green, M. C. (Eds.), Persuasion: Psychological insights and perspectives (pp. 171–194). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Nemeth, C. J., & Goncalo, J. A. (2011). Rogues and heroes: Finding value in dissent. In Jetten, J. & Hornsey, M. (Eds.), Rebels in groups: Dissent, deviance, difference and defiance (pp. 73–92). Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar

Nemeth, C. J., & Kwan, J. L. (1985). Originality of word associations as a function of majority vs. minority influence. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 277–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nemeth, C. J., & Kwan, J. L. (1987). Minority influence, divergent thinking and detection of correct solutions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17, 788–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nemeth, C. J., Mosier, K., & Chiles, C. (1992). When convergent thought improves performance: Majority versus minority influence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 139–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nemeth, C. J., & Rogers, J. (1996). Dissent and the search for information. British Journal of Social Psychology. Special Issue: Minority Influences, 35, 67–76.Google Scholar

Nemeth, C. J., Swedlund, M., & Kanki, B. (1974). Patterning of a minority's responses and their influence on the majority. European Journal of Social Psychology, 4, 53–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nemeth, C. J., & Wachtler, J. (1974). Creating the perceptions of consistency and confidence: A necessary condition for minority influence. Sociometry, 37, 529–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nemeth, C. J., & Wachtler, J. (1983). Creative problem solving as a result of majority vs. minority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nicholls, J. (1983). Conceptions of ability and achievement motivation: A theory and its implications for education. In Paris, S., Olson, G., & Stevenson, H. (Eds.), Learning and motivation in the classroom (pp. 211–237). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Nijhof, W., & Kommers, P. (1982). Analysis of cooperation in relation to cognitive controversy. Second International Conference on Cooperation in Education, Provo, Utah, July.

Nijstad, B. A., Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (2003). Cognitive stimulation and interference in idea generating groups. In Paulus, P. B. & Nijstad, B. A. (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 137–159). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

Noonan-Wagner, M. (1975). Intimacy of self-disclosure and response processes as factors affecting the development of interpersonal relationships. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.

Nussbaum, E. M. (2008a). Collaborative discourse, argumentation, and learning: Preface and literature review. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 345–359.Google Scholar

Nussbaum, E. M. (2008b). Using argumentation vee diagrams (AVDs) for promoting argument/counterargument integration in reflective writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 549–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar