Abstract
When considering a complex and controversial issue, students may engage in a biased assimilation of the evidence and strengthen their existing attitudes rather than become appreciative of both sides of the issue. However, a consider-the-opposite strategy in which students argue a position contrary to their current opinion may eliminate this biased assimilation. We conducted in-class debates in 3 different courses and randomly assigned students to argue for or against their current attitude on an issue. Our results indicate that arguing a position consistent with one's opinion does produce biased assimilation but that arguing for a position inconsistent with one's opinion reduces this tendency. We discuss how best to design in-class debates to maximize their educational value.