Background/Objectives: Scaffolding plays a vital role in sustaining collaborative discourse and shifting attention. However, current research lacks a detailed understanding of how scaffold use affects participants’ discussions at the neural level. This paper investigates whether epistemic scaffold types (Design-mode and Belief-mode) influence participants’ collaborative discourse and subsequently modulate N400 event-related potential amplitude during sentence processing. Methods: Participants in two experimental conditions engaged in an online discussion using scaffolds either representing Design-mode (My theory) or Belief-mode (I agree/I disagree). Participants then individually completed a stimulus-based decision-making task involving sentences representing the two modes. Pre- and post-surveys assessed changes in participants’ attitudes across the study. Machine learning models were used to examine participants’ discourse patterns while event-related potential (ERP) analyses of the N400 component assessed neural responses during the decision-making task. Results: Machine learning analyses indicated differences between the two scaffold modes, while ERP analyses revealed a modest N400 amplitude difference between the two modes, during the 380–430 ms time window. Conclusions: Findings suggest that epistemic scaffolding can influence collaborative discourse and neural processing, offering implications for the design of scaffolded learning for researchers and practitioners.
Yuan et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: