本研究旨在探討扮演「惡魔代言人」策略對國小學生進行線上論證的影響。本研究採準實驗研究法，邀請206位國小六年級學生進行為期三週的線上論證活動，並將參與者隨機分為「惡魔組」與「無惡魔組」，其中扮演「惡魔代言人」角色的學生在論證活動期間需執行「惡魔代言人」的任務，指在進行線上論證時需檢驗他人發表的論述，並針對論述進行質疑、挑戰、或要求補充資料。由於此三週的線上論證活動主題是以網路著作權倫理與法律的內容為設計基礎，故除了檢視學生的論證能力外，亦同時檢視網路著作權倫理與法律的知識、網路著作權倫理與法律的態度、與網路著作權倫理與法律的行為意向來瞭解在線上論證中導入「惡魔代言人」策略的效果。研究結果顯示在論證能力方面，「惡魔組」在證據及反駁的後測分數顯著高於「無惡魔組」；而在網路著作權倫理與法律知識、態度、行為意向方面，兩組的後測分數皆沒有顯著差異。

This study explored effects of assigning students to play 'devil's advocate' roles in online community-based collaborative argumentation. It was hypothesized that students in community with one playing the role of ‘devil's advocate’ in argumentation skills (claim, data, warrant, rebuttal) and achieved differently from students in community but without any role arrangement during online collaborative argumentation on copyright law and ethics on the web. The study adopted a pre-test and post-test quasi-experimental design with an experimental group (N=99) and a comparison group (N=98). The argumentation activity was consisted of three topics and was conducted during the weekly computer class of each class (each lasted 40 minutes). The results show that the role of devil's advocate' has an impact for students to learn argumentation skill on the web.

中文部份
尹玫君. (2003). 我國師範院校資訊倫理態度與行為之研究. 南大學報, 37(1), 1-18.
尹玫君. (2004). 國小學生資訊倫理態度和行為的探討. 南大學報, 38(2), 1-21.
尹玫君, & 王瑞玉. (2008). 國小網路著作權教學設計與實施成效之探討. 教育研究學報, 42(1), 57-78.
台灣網路資訊中心. (2009). Retrieved 6/21, 2011, from http://statistics.twnic.net.tw/item04.htm
林守仁, 蔡瑜珍, 江侑霖, & 林育慈. (2006). 國小學童資訊態度之研究. In Proceedings of 2006台灣網際網路研討會, 花蓮.
張春興. (2006). 教育心理學. 臺北: 臺灣東華書局.
郭生玉. (2001). 心理與教育研究法. 中和市: 精華書局.
著作權法. (2010修正).
黃柏鴻, & 林樹聲. (2007). 論證教學相關實證性研究之回顧與省思（literature review and reflection on the research about argumentation instruction）. 科學教育月刊(302), 5-20.
經濟部智慧財產局. (2007). 智慧財產權 171 小題庫. from http://www.tipo.gov.tw/ch/MultiMedia_FileDownload.ashx?guid=a3a5d6f0-52a8-4101-b1dd-2662b50ec002
蔡俊彥, 黃台珠, & 楊錦潭. (2007). 符合 toulmin論證模式之系統發展研究. In Proceedings of TANET2007臺灣網際網路研討會, 國立台灣大學.
鄧達鈞, 張志銘, 陳昭秀, & 周倩. (2007). 國小六年級網路素養與倫理課程之發展與實施成效探討. In Proceedings of 2007台灣網際網路研討會, 台北市.
蕭妙香, & 陳瀅淑. (2006). 台南市國小學童法律知識與態度之探討. 教育研究學報, 40(1), 23-49.
 
英文部分
Aldler, P. R., & Christopher, J. A. (1998). Internet community priner- overview and business opportunity. from http:// www.digitalplaces.com/
Andrews, D. C. (2002). Audience-specific online community design. Commun. ACM, 45(4), 64-68.
Andriessen, J. (2006). Arguing to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Andriessen, J., Baker, M., & Suthers, D. (2003). Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. In Computer-supported collaborative learning (Vol. 1, pp. 205-216). The Netherlands, Boston: Dordrecht.
Baker, M. J. (1999). Argumentation and constructive interaction (Vol. 5 Foundations of Argumentative Text Processing). Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam Press.
Baker, M. J., & Lund, K. (1996). Flexible structuring the interaction in a cscl environment. In P. Brna, A. Paiva & J. Self (Eds.), Proceedings of EuroAIED (pp. 401-407), Lisbon: Fundacao Calouste Gulbenkian.
Bell, P. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with kie. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797-817.
Benbunan-Fich, R., & Hiltz, S. R. (1999). Educational applications of cmcs: Solving case studies through asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(3), 0.
Black, A. (2005). The use of asynchronous discussion: Creating a text of talk. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(1), 5-24.
Browne, M. N., & Keeley, S. M. (2007). Asking the right questions: A guide to critical thinking (8 ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Cho, K. L., & Jonassen, D. H. (2002). The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation and problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 5-22.
Clark, D., & Sampson, V. (2007). Personally-seeded discussions to scaffold online argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 29(3), 253-277.
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of educational research, 64(1), 1.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Collison, G., Elbaum, B., Haavind, S., & Tinker, R. (2000). Facilitating online learning: Effective strategies for moderators. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.
Cosier, R. A., & Schwenk, C. R. (1990). Agreement and thinking alike: Ingredients for poor decisions. The Executive, 4(1), 69-74.
CoŞKun, H. (2011). The effects of group size, memory instruction, and session length on the creative performance in electronic brainstorming groups. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 11(1), 91-95.
Cunningham, D. (1992). Beyond educational psychology: Steps toward an educational semiotic. Educational Psychology Review, 4(2), 165-194.
Derry, S. J., Levin, J. R., Osana, H. P., Jones, M. S., & peterson, M. (2000). Section on teaching, learning, and human development - fostering students' statistical and scientific thinking: Lesson learned from an innovative college course. American Educational Research Journal, 37(3), 747-775.
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.
Duffy, T. M., Dueber, B., & Hawley, C. (1998). Critical thinking in a distributed environment:A pedagogical base for the design of conferencing systems. In C. J. B. K. S. King (Ed.), Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 51-78). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dufner, D., Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (1994, 4-7 Jan. 1994). Distributed group support: A preliminary analysis of the effects of the use of voting tools and sequential procedures. In Proceedings of System Sciences, 1994. Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Hawaii International Conference on (pp. 114-123).
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). Tapping into argumentation: Developments in the application of toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915-933.
Ertmer, P. A., Richardson, J. C., Belland, B., Camin, D., Connolly, P., Coulthard, G., et al. (2007). Using peer feedback to enhance the quality of student online postings: An exploratory study. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2), 78-99.
Fernback, J., & Thompson, B. (1995). Virtual communities: Abort, retry, failure? Paper presented at the the Annual Meeting of the International Communication Association, Albuquerque. New Mexico.
Galegher, J., & Kraut, R. R. (1994). Computer-mediated communication for intellectual teamwork: An experiment in group writing. Information Systems Research, 5(2), 110-138.
Gerber, S., Scott, L., Clements, D., & Sarama, J. (2005). Instructor influence on reasoned argument in discussion boards. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(2), 25-39.
Ghazali, H. (2003). Examining high-school students' views on computer and information ethics. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA.
Golanics, J. D., & Nussbaum, E. M. (2008). Enhancing online collaborative argumentation through question elaboration and goal instructions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(3), 167-180.
Gose, M. (2009). When socratic dialogue is flagging: Questions and strategies for engaging students. College Teaching, 57(1), 45-50.
Green, S. B., Salkind, N. J., & Akey, T. M. (2000). Using spss for windows : Analyzing and understanding data. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Handley, I. M., & Runnion, B. M. (2011). Evidence that unconscious thinking influences persuasion based on argument quality. Social Cognition, 29(6), 668-682.
Hong, K. S., Brudvik, O. C., & Chee, Y. S. (2006). The impact of structured discussion on students' attitudes and dispositions toward argumentation. In R. Mizoguchi, P. Dillenbourg & Z. Zhu (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Computers in Education (pp. 133-140), Amsterdam. IOS Press.
Hopkins, P. E., & Hirst, D. E. (1998). Comprehensive income reporting and analysts' valuation judgments. Journal of Accounting Research, 36, 47-75.
Jamaludin, A., Chee, Y. S., & Ho, C. M. L. (2009). Fostering argumentative knowledge construction through enactive role play in second life. Computers & Education, 53(2), 317-329.
Janssen, J., Erkens, G., & Kanselaar, G. (2007). Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1105-1125.
Jeong, A., & Joung, S. (2007). Scaffolding collaborative argumentation in asynchronous discussions with message constraints and message labels. Computers & Education, 48(3), 427-445.
Jeong, A., & Lee, J. (2008). The effects of active versus reflective learning style on the processes of critical discourse in computer-supported collaborative argumentation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(4), 651-665.
Joiner, R., & Jones, S. (2003). The effects of communication medium on argumentation and the development of critical thinking. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(8), 861-871.
Jonassen, D. H., & Kim, B. (2010). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Design justifications and guidelines. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(4), 439-457.
Kaiser, G. (2000). Building computing ethics from the ground up. In Proceedings of Proceedings of the 28th annual ACM SIGUCCS conference on User services: Building the future (pp. 146-148), Richmond, Virginia, United States. ACM.
Kannan, P. K., Chang, A.-M., & Whinston, A. B. (2000). Electronic communities in e-business: Their role and issues. Information Systems Frontiers, 1(4), 415-426.
Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence : The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In D.Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kuhn, D., Goh, W., Iordanou, K., & Shaenfield, D. (2008). Arguing on the computer: A microgenetic study of developing argument skills in a computer-supported environment. Child Development, 79(5), 1310-1328.
Limon, M. S., Turner, M. M., & Zompetti, J. P. (2008). Informal arguing: The likelihood of providing arguments, rebuttals, refutations, and evidence in an argumentative interaction. Argumentation and advocacy : the journal of the American Forensic Association, 45(1), 37-48.
Lin, C.-H., Huang, S.-M., Wu, P.-S., & Chiu, C.-H. (2010). Primary school students' decision-making argumentation in cyber-ethics dilemmas. In Proceedings of the 40th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Washington, DC.
Lin, Y.-M., & Laffey, J. (2006). Exploring the relationship between mediating tools and student perception of interdependence in a cscl environment. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17(4), 385-400.
Lizotte, D. J., Harris, C. J., McNeill, K. L., Marx, R. W., & Krajcik, J. (2003). Usable assessments aligned with curriculum materials: Measuring explanation as a scientific way of knowing. Paper presented at the the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Chicago, IL.
Lizotte, D. J., McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2004). Teacher practices that support students' construction of scientific explanations in middle school classrooms. In Y. Kafai, W. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. Nixon & F. Herrera (Eds.), Proceedings of Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Learning sciences (pp. 310-317), Santa Monica, California. International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Mabrito, M. (2006). A study of synchronous versus asynchronous collaboration in an online business writing class. American Journal of Distance Education, 20(2), 93-107.
McAlister, S., Revenscroft, A., & Scanlon, E. (2004). Combining interaction and context design to support collaborative argumentation using a tool for synchronous cmc. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(3), 194-204.
McCann, T. M. (1989). Student argumentative writing knowledge and ability at three grade levels. Research in the Teaching of English, 23(1), 62-76.
Mintzes, J. J. (2010). Learning argumentation skills through instruction in socioscientific issues: The effect of ability level. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(6), 993-1017.
Nemeth, C., Brown, K., & Rogers, J. (2001). Devil's advocate versus authentic dissent: Stimulating quantity and quality. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 31, 707-720.
Nemeth, C. J., Connell, J. B., Rogers, J. D., & Brown, K. S. (2001). Improving decision making by means of dissent. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 48-58.
Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553-576.
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.
Nussbaum, E. M. (2002). Scaffolding argumentation in the social studies classroom. Social Studies, 93(2), 79.
Nussbaum, E. M., & Golanics, J. D. (2008). Enhancing online collaborative argumentation through question elaboration and goal instructions. J. Comput. Assisted Learn. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(3), 167-180.
Oh, S., & Jonassen, D. H. (2007). Original article: Scaffolding online argumentation during problem solving. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(2), 95-110.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of research in science teaching, 41(10), 994-1020.
Osborne, J. A. t. l. i. s. T. r. o. c., critical discourse. Science Science, 328(5977), 463-466. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science Science, 328(5977), 463-466.
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Perkins, D. N., Farady, M., & Bushey, B. . (1991). Everyday reasoning and the roots of intelligence. In D. N. P. J. Voss, and J. Segal (Ed.), Informal reasoning (pp. 83-105). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Piaget, J. (1932). The moral judgment of the child. New York: Free Press Paperbacks.
Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child. New York: Basic Books , Inc.
Pilkington, R., & Kuminek, P. (2004). Using role-play activity with synchronous cmc to encourage critical reflection on peer debate. In M. Monteith (Ed.), Ict for curriculum enhancement (pp. 69-84): Intellect L & D E F A E.
Pilkington, R., & Walker, A. (2003a). Using cmc to develop argumentation skills in chileren with a 'literacy deficit'. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (computer-supported collaborative learning series) (pp. 144-176). Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic.
Pilkington, R., & Walker, S. (2003b). Facilitating debate in networked learning: Reflecting on online synchronous discussion in higher education. Instructional Science, 31(1-2), 41-63.
Raghavan, S. A. (1990). Birbal a computer-based devil's advocate. In Proceedings of System Sciences, 1990., Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Annual Hawaii International Conference on (pp. 391-402), Kailua-Kona, HI , USA.
Ravenscroft, A., & Matheson, M. P. (2001, 6-8 August). Carpe diem: Models and methodologies for designing engaging and interactive e-learning discourse. In T. Okamoto, R. Hartley, Kinshuk & J. P. Klus (Eds.), Proceedings of Second IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT2001) (pp. 74-77), Madison, WI. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA.
Ravits, J. (1997). An isd model for building online communities: Furthering the dialogue. In O. Abel, N. Maushak & K. Wright (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1997 national convention of the association for educational communications and technology (pp. 297-307).
Retails, S., Pain, H., & Haggith, M. (1996). Arguing with the devil: Teaching in controversial domains. In C. Frasson, G. Gauthier & A. Lesgold (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems (Vol. 1086, pp. 659-667). Heidelberg: Springer Berlin.
Reznitskaya, A., Kuo, L.-J., Clark, A.-M., Miller, B., Jadallah, M., Anderson, R. C., et al. (2009). Collaborative reasoning: A dialogic approach to group discussions. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39(1), 29 - 48.
Rheingold, H. (2000). The virtual community: Homesteading on the electronic frontier.
Rojas-Drummond, S., & Zapata, M. (2004). Exploratory talk, argumentation and reasoning in mexican primary school children. Language and Education, 18(6), 539-555.
Savery, J., & Duffy, T. M. (1996). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. In B. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design: Educational Technology Publications Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Scheuer, O., Loll, F., Pinkwart, N., & McLaren, B. M. (2010). Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state of the art. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5, 43-102.
Schneider, B., & Cheslock, N. (2003). Measuring results gaining insight on behavior change strategies and evaluation methods from environmental education, museum, health, and social marketing programs. from http://catalog.hathitrust.org/api/volumes/oclc/59360114.html
Schommer-Aikins, M., & Master, E. (2009). Ways of knowing and willingness to argue. The Journal of Psychology, 143(2), 117-132.
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1994). Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Seng Chee Tan, A J Turgeon, & Jonassen, D. H. (2001). Develop critical thinking in group problem solving through computer-supported collaborative argumentation: A case study. Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education, 30, 97-104.
Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 235-260.
Simonneaux, L. (2008). Argumentation in socialscientific contexts. In S. E. M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Ed.), Argumentation in science education : Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: The Netherlands: Springer.
Spatariu, A., Hartley, K., Schraw, G., Bendixen, L. D., & Quinn, L. F. (2007). The influence of the discussion leader procedure on the quality of arguments in online discussions. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 37(1), 83-103.
Strohmetz, D. B., & Skleder, A. A. (1992). The use of role-play in teaching research ethics: A validation study. Teaching of Psychology, 19(2), 106.
Swan, K. (2002). Building learning communities in online courses: The importance of interaction. Education, Communication & Information, 2(1), 23-49.
Swinyard, William R., Rinne, Heikki, Kau, & Keng., A. (1990). The morality of software piracy: A cross-cultural analysis. Business Ethics, 9(8), 655.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2000). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Tobin, S. J., & Weary, G. (2008). The effects of causal uncertainty, causal importance, and initial attitude on attention to causal persuasive arguments. Soc. Cogn. Social Cognition, 26(1), 44-65.
Topper, A. (2005). Facilitating student interactions through discursive moves: An instructor's experience teaching online graduate courses in educational technology. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 6(1), 55-67.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Toulmin, S., Rieke, R., & Janik, A. (1984). An introduction to reasoning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Macmillan.
Veerman, A., & Veldhuis-Diermanse, E. (2001). Collaborative learning through computer-mediated communication in academic education. In A. E. K. H. P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Proceedings of the First European Conferenceon CSCL, Maastricht. McLuhan Institute, University of Maastricht.
Veerman, A. L., Andriessen, J. E. B., & Kanselaar, G. (2000). Learning through synchronous electronic discussion. Computers & Education, 34(3-4), 269-290.
Voss, J. F., & Means, M. L. (1991). Learning to reason via instruction in argumentation: James F. Voss, 634 Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260.
Walker, S. A. (2004). Socratic strategies and devil's advocacy in synchronous cmc debate. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(3), 172-182.
Ward, S. C., & Tiessen, E. L. (1997). Adding educational value to the web: Active learning with a live page. Educational Technology, 22-30.
Wecker, C., & Fischer, F. (2007). Fading scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning: The role of distributed monitoring. In C. A. Chinn, G. Erkens & S. Puntambekar (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL 2007: Of mice, minds and society (pp. 763-771), Mahwah, NJ. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 46(1), 71-95.
Williams, B. K., & Sawyer, S. C. (2003). Using information technology : A practical introduction to computers & communications (5th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
WIPO. (1967). Convention establishing the world intellectual property organization. Retrieved September 3, 2011, from http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/convention/trtdocs_wo029.html
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35-62.