anales de psicología, 2014, vol. 30, nº 3 (octubre), 841-851 © Copyright 2014: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Murcia.

Murcia (España)
http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.3.201241 ISSN edición impresa: 0212-9728. ISSN edición web (http://revistas.um.es/analesps): 1695-2294

Cooperative Learning in 21st Century

David W. Johnson* and Roger T. Johnson

University of Minnesota, USA

Título: Aprendizaje cooperativo en el Siglo XXI. Abstract: The 21st century brings four important challenges in which co-
Resumen: El siglo XXI trae consigo cuatro grandes retos en los que la operation plays a central role: (1) a rapidly increasing global interdepend-
cooperación juega un papel fundamental: (1) una interdependencia mundial ence that will result in increasing local diversity as well as more frequent
cada vez mayor que se traducirá en el aumento de la diversidad local, así and intense conflicts, (2) the increasing number of democracies throughout
como en conflictos más frecuentes e intensos, (2) el aumento de sistemas the world, (3) the need for creative entrepreneurs, and (4) the growing im-
democráticos en el mundo, (3) la necesidad de emprendedores creativos y portance of interpersonal relationships that affect the development of per-
(4) la creciente importancia de las relaciones interpersonales que afectan al sonal identity. The tools for meeting these challenges include cooperative
desarrollo de la identidad personal. Las herramientas para responder a estos learning. In this article the nature of cooperative learning will be reviewed,
desafíos incluyen el aprendizaje cooperativo. En este artículo se revisará la the underlying theory of social interdependence will be discussed, and the
naturaleza del aprendizaje cooperativo, se discutirá la teoría de la interde- results of the research on cooperative learning will be briefly reviewed.
pendencia social que subyace, y se revisarán, brevemente, los resultados de The way in which cooperative learning contributes to meeting the four
la investigación sobre el aprendizaje cooperativo. challenges will then be discussed.
Palabras clave: Aprendizaje cooperativo; controversia; interdependencia Key words: Cooperative learning; controversy; global interdependence;
global; emprendedores creativos; democracia creative entrepreneurs; democracy

The Tools for Meeting Four Important Chal- ate, they work together to accomplish shared goals, and
lenges of the 21st Century there is a mutual responsibility to work for one’s own suc-
cess. Cooperative learning is usually contrasted with com-
Four of the important challenges of the 21st century in petitive and individualistic learning. Competition is work-
which cooperation will play a central role are as follows: ing against each other to achieve a goal that only one or a
1. A rapidly increasing global interdependence that will re- few can attain. In competitive situations, the goals of the
sult in local diversity as well as more frequent and in- separate participants are so linked that there is a negative
tense conflicts. correlation among their goal attainments; each individual
2. The increasing number of democracies throughout the perceives that he or she can reach his or her goal if and only
world. if the other participants cannot attain their goals (Deutsch,
3. The need for creative entrepreneurs. 1949). Thus, individuals seek an outcome that is personally
4. The growing importance of interpersonal relationships. beneficial but detrimental to all others in the situation. In-
dividualistic efforts exist when individuals work by them-
Cooperative learning is an essential tool for training indi- selves to accomplish goals unrelated to those of others. In
viduals how to meet these challenges. It is through building individualistic situations, there is no correlation among par-
and maintaining cooperative efforts throughout the school ticipants' goal attainments; each individual perceives that he
day for 12 years or more that individuals develop the com- or she can reach his or her goal regardless of whether other
petencies they need to manage cooperation at the global lev- individuals attain or do not attain their goals (Deutsch, 1962;
el as well as the individual and societal levels. Johnson & Johnson, 1999). Thus, individuals seek an out-
come that is personally beneficial. In the ideal classroom, all
students would learn how to work cooperatively with others,
Cooperative Learning compete for fun and enjoyment, and work autonomously on
their own. The teacher decides which goal structure to im-
Cooperative learning is the instructional use of small groups so plement within each lesson. The conditions under which
that students work together to maximize their own and each competitive and individualistic learning may be productively
other’s learning (Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 2013). In used may be found in Johnson and Johnson (1999). This
cooperative situations, the goal attainments of participants paper deals only with cooperation.
are positively correlated; individuals perceive that they can There are four types of cooperative learning (Johnson et
reach their goals if and only if the other group members also al., 2013): Formal cooperative learning, informal coopera-
do so (Deutsch, 1949). Thus, an individual seeks an out- tive learning, cooperative base groups, and constructive con-
come that is beneficial to him- or herself and beneficial to all troversy. Cooperative learning groups may be used to teach
other individuals with whom the person is cooperatively specific content (formal cooperative learning groups), to en-
linked. Any assignment in any curriculum for any age stu- sure active cognitive processing of information during a lec-
dent can be done cooperatively. When individuals cooper- ture (informal cooperative learning groups), and to provide
long-term support and assistance for academic progress (co-
* Dirección para correspondencia [Correspondence address]:
operative base groups). In addition, cooperation involves
David W. Johnson. University of Minnesota. Minneapolis, Minnesota intellectual conflicts known as constructive controversies.
55455 (USA). E-mail: [email protected]

- 841 -
842 David W. Johnson and Roger T. Johnson

Formal cooperative learning consists of students working to- the long-term caring peer relationships necessary to influ-
gether, for one class period to several weeks, to achieve mu- ence members consistently to work hard in school. They
tual learning goals and complete jointly specific tasks and as- formally meet to discuss the academic progress of each
signments (such as solving a set of problems, completing a member, provide help and assistance to each other, and veri-
curriculum unit, writing a report or theme, conducting an fy that each member is completing assignments and pro-
experiment, or reading a story, play, chapter, or book). Any gressing satisfactory through the academic program. Base
course requirement or assignment may be restructured to be groups may also be responsible for letting absent group
cooperative. In formal cooperative learning groups the in- members know what went on in class when they miss a ses-
structor: sion. Informally, members interact every day within and be-
1. Specifies the objectives for the lesson (one academic and tween classes, discussing assignments, and helping each oth-
one social skills). er with homework. The use of base groups tends to im-
2. Makes a series of decisions about how to structure the proves attendance, personalizes the work required and the
learning groups (what size groups, how students are as- school experience, and improve the quality and quantity of
signed to groups, what roles to assign, how to arrange learning. The larger the class or school and the more com-
materials, and how to arrange the room). plex and difficult the subject matter, the more important it is
3. Teaches the academic concepts, principles, and strategies to have base groups.
that the students are to master and apply, and explains Constructive controversy exists when one person’s ideas,
the (a) task to be completed, (b) criteria for success, (c) opinions, information, theories, or conclusions are incom-
positive interdependence, (d) individual accountability, patible with those of another, and the two seek to reach an
and (e) expected student behaviors. agreement (Johnson & Johnson, 2007, 2007, 2009b). One
4. Monitors the functioning of the learning groups and in- of the central aspects of individuals promoting each other’s
tervenes to (a) teach collaborative skills and (b) provide success is disagreement and augmentation among members
assistance in academic learning when it is needed. of cooperative groups when they have to make a decision or
5. Evaluates student performance against the preset criteria come to an agreement. Constructive controversy involves
for excellence, and ensures that groups process how ef- what Aristotle called deliberate discourse (that is, the discussion
fectively members worked together. of the advantages and disadvantages of proposed actions)
aimed at synthesizing novel solutions (that is, creative problem
Informal cooperative learning consists of students working solving). Constructive controversy begins with randomly assigning
together to achieve a joint learning goal in temporary, ad- students to heterogeneous cooperative learning groups (usu-
hoc groups that last from a few minutes to one class period. ally of four members). Each group receives an issue on
During a lecture, demonstration, or film they can be used to which to write a report and pass a test. Each cooperative
focus student attention on the material to be learned, set a group is divided in two. One half takes the con position on
mood conducive to learning, help set expectations as to the issue; the other half takes the pro position. Each half re-
what will be covered in a class session, ensure that students ceives the instructional materials necessary to define their
cognitively process the material being taught, and provide position and point them toward supporting information.
closure to an instructional session. During direct teaching The materials highlight the cooperative goal of reaching a
the instructional challenge for the teacher is to ensure that consensus on the issue (by synthesizing the best reasoning
students do the intellectual work of organizing material, ex- from both sides) and writing a quality group report. Stu-
plaining it, summarizing it, and integrating it into existing dents then (a) research, learn about, and prepare their as-
conceptual structures. Informal cooperative learning groups signed position; (b) present a persuasive case that their posi-
are often organized so that students engaged in three-to-five tion is correct; (c) engage in an open discussion in which
minute focused discussions before and after a lecture and there is spirited disagreement; (d) reverse perspectives and
three-to-five minute turn-to-your-partner discussions inter- present the best case for the opposing position; (e) agree on
spersed throughout a lecture. In this way the main problem a synthesis or integration of the best reasoning from both
of lectures can be countered: "The information passes from the sides; and (f) reflect on the process so that they may learn
notes of the professor to the notes of the student without passing through from the experience.
the mind of either one." When used in combination, cooperative formal, infor-
Cooperative base groups are long-term, heterogeneous coop- mal, base groups, and constructive controversy provide an
erative learning groups with stable membership in which overall structure for school learning.
students provide one another with support, encouragement,
and assistance to make academic progress (attend class, Outcomes of Cooperation
complete all assignments, learn). They also help one another
develop cognitively and socially in healthy ways, as well as The numerous outcomes of cooperative efforts may be sub-
hold one another accountable for striving to learn. Base sumed within three broad categories: effort to achieve, posi-
groups meet daily (or whenever the class meets). They are tive interpersonal relationships, and psychological adjust-
permanent (lasting from one to several years) and provide ment. Because research participants have varied as to eco-

anales de psicología, 2014, vol. 30, nº 3 (octubre)

 Cooperative Learning in 21st Century 843

nomic class, age, sex, and cultural background, because a Cooperating on a task also results in more task-oriented and
wide variety of research tasks and measures of the depend- personal social support than do competitive or individualis-
ent variables have been used, and because the research has tic efforts.
been conducted by many different researchers with marked- Working cooperatively with peers, and valuing coopera-
ly different orientations working in different settings and in tion, results in greater psychological health and higher self-
different decades, the overall body of research on social in- esteem than does competing with peers or working inde-
terdependence has considerable generalizability. pendently. Personal ego-strength, self-confidence, inde-
Over 685 studies have been conducted over the past 195 pendence, and autonomy are all promoted by being involved
years to give an answer to the question of how successful in cooperative efforts with caring people, who are commit-
competitive, individualistic, and cooperative efforts are in ted to each other's success and well-being, and who respect
promoting productivity and achievement (Johnson & John- each other as separate and unique individuals. When indi-
son, in press). The results are expressed in effect sizes that viduals work together to complete assignments, they interact
show the strength of the relationship between social inter- (mastering social skills and competencies), they promote
dependence and achievement. Working together to achieve each other's success (gaining self-worth), and they form per-
a common goal produces higher achievement and greater sonal as well as professional relationships (creating the basis
productivity than does working competitively or individual- for healthy social development). Individuals' psychological
istically. This is so well confirmed by so much research that adjustment and health tend to increase when schools are
it stands as one of the strongest principles of social and or- dominated by cooperative efforts. The more individuals
ganizational psychology. Cooperation also resulted in more work cooperatively with others, the more they see them-
higher-level reasoning, more frequent generation of new ide- selves as worthwhile and as having value, the greater their
as and solutions (i.e., process gain), and greater transfer of productivity, the greater their acceptance and support of
what is learned within one situation to another (i.e., group to others, and the more autonomous and independent they
individual transfer) than did competitive or individualistic tend to be. Cooperative experiences are not a luxury. They
learning. The superiority of cooperative over competitive are an absolute necessary for the healthy development of in-
and individualistic efforts increased as the task was more dividuals who can function independently.
conceptual, the more problem solving was required, the There are bidirectional relationships among efforts to
more desirable was higher-level reasoning and critical think- achieve, quality of relationships, and psychological health
ing, the more creative the answers needed to be, the more (Johnson & Johnson, 1989). Each influences the others.
long-term retention was desired, and the greater the applica- First, caring and committed friendships come from a sense
tion required of what was learned. of mutual accomplishment, mutual pride in joint work, and
Individuals care more about each other and are more the bonding that results from joint efforts. The more stu-
committed to each other's success and well-being when they dents care about each other, on the other hand, the harder
work together cooperatively than when they compete to see they will work to achieve mutual learning goals. Second,
who is best or work independently from each other. This is joint efforts to achieve mutual goals promote higher self-
true when individuals are homogeneous and it is also true esteem, self-efficacy, personal control, and confidence in
when individuals differ in intellectual ability, handicapping their competencies. The healthier psychologically individu-
conditions, ethnic membership, culture, social class, and als are, on the other hand, the better able to they are to work
gender. When individuals are heterogeneous, cooperating with others to achieve mutual goals. Third, psychological
on a task results in more realistic and positive views of each health is built on the internalization of the caring and respect
other. Cooperative learning has been demonstrated to be an received from loved-ones. Friendships are developmental
essential prerequisite for successful ethnic integration and advantages that promote self-esteem, self-efficacy, and gen-
inclusion of handicapped peers (Johnson, Maruyama, & eral psychological adjustment. The healthier people are psy-
Johnson, 1983; Johnson & Johnson, 1989). As relationships chologically (i.e., free of psychological pathology such as de-
become more positive, absenteeism and turnover of mem- pression, paranoia, anxiety, fear of failure, repressed anger,
bership decreases, member commitment to organizational hopelessness, and meaninglessness), on the other hand, the
goals increases, feelings of personal responsibility to the or- more caring and committed their relationships. Because
ganization increase, willingness to take on difficult tasks in- each outcome can induce the others, they are likely to be
creases, motivation and persistence in working toward goal found together. They are a package with each outcome a
achievement increase, satisfaction and morale increases, will- door into all three. And together they induce positive inter-
ingness to endure pain and frustration on behalf of the or- dependence and promotive interaction.
ganization increases, willingness to defend the organization Because of the amount and consistency of research sup-
against external criticism or attack increases, willingness to porting its use, cooperative learning will always be present in
listen to and be influenced by colleagues increases, commit- 21st century educational practice.
ment to each other's professional growth and success in-
creases, and productivity increases (Johnson & F. Johnson,
2013; Johnson & Johnson, 1989; Watson & Johnson, 1972).

anales de psicología, 2014, vol. 30, nº 3 (octubre)

844 David W. Johnson and Roger T. Johnson

Four Crucial Challenges of the 21st Century erative learning activities. In order to understand the inter-
dependence increasing among the various levels of human
Cooperative learning is essential for meeting the four crucial interaction, the nature of social interdependence needs to be
challenges unique to the 21st century. These strategies pro- explained and the five essential elements for structuring co-
vide students with the essential skills necessary to address operative need to be defined. Then two of the implications
each of these challenges in the more collaborative school of global interdependence, diversity and conflicts within de-
and work environment. The four challenges discussed are cision making situations, are discussed.
not the only challenges that require competencies in struc-
turing and maintaining cooperative efforts, but they are ma- Nature of Social Interdependence
jor ones that must be addressed.
The use of cooperative learning has its roots in the crea-
Challenge 1: Global Interdependence tion of social interdependence theory. Theorizing on social
interdependence began in the early 1900s, when one of the
The 21st century is characterized by increasing techno- founders of the Gestalt School of Psychology, Kurt Koffka,
logical, economic, ecological, and political interdependence proposed that groups were dynamic wholes in which the in-
among individuals, communities, organizations, countries, terdependence among members could vary. One of his col-
and regions of the world. There is an increasing need for leagues, Kurt Lewin refined Koffka's notions in the 1920s
the countries and regions of the world to coordinate their and 1930s while stating that the essence of a group is the in-
activities and cooperate with each other. British Prime Min- terdependence among members (created by common goals)
ister Gordon Brown believed that the nations and regions of which results in the group being a "dynamic whole" so that a
the world urgently needed to (a) stop viewing their relation- change in the state of any member or subgroup changes the
ship as one of competing interests to one of common inter- state of any other member or subgroup. For interdepend-
ests and (b) launch new international rules and institutions ence to exist, there must be more than one person or entity
to enhance their cooperative efforts. Both beneficial and involved, and the persons or entities must have impact on
harmful effects, however, may result from increasing world each other in that a change in the state of one causes a
interdependence. Global interdependence accelerates the change in the state of the others. Social interdependence,
development of countries and increases incomes and living therefore, exists when the outcomes of individuals are af-
standards through heightened world trade. In contrast, fected by each other's actions (Johnson & Johnson, 1989).
global interdependence increases vulnerability of each coun- Social interdependence may be differentiated from depend-
try to all other countries. The economies of countries are no ence and independence. Social dependence exists when
longer autonomous. Internal economic prosperity or dis- the outcomes of Person A are affected by Person B's ac-
ruptions in one country affect the economy of many other tions, but the reverse is not true. Social independence ex-
countries. Inflation can spread across national borders. ists when individuals' outcomes are unaffected by each oth-
Drastic actions by one country to save its economy can er's actions. The absence of social interdependence and de-
quickly translate into economic hardships for another. pendence results in individualistic efforts.
Countries are far more vulnerable to outside economic dis- In the late 1940s, one of Lewin's graduate students, Mor-
ruptions. Thus, while positive interdependence creates ton Deutsch, extended Lewin's reasoning about social inter-
greater worldwide prosperity and productivity, it also in- dependence and formulated a theory of cooperation and
creases the capability of each country to influence the events competition (Deutsch, 1949, 1962). Deutsch conceptualized
within other countries. They become more interdependent. two types of social interdependence: positive interdepend-
Global interdependence also means that the solution to ence (cooperation) and negative interdependence (competi-
most major problems individual countries face (for example, tion). He later added no interdependence (individualistic ef-
disease, hunger, environmental contamination, global warm- forts). The basic premise of social interdependence theory is
ing, terrorism, nuclear proliferation) are increasingly ones that the type of social interdependence structured in a situa-
that cannot be solved by actions taken only at the national tion determines how individuals interact with each other
level. This internationalization of problems blurs the lines that, in turn, largely determines outcomes (Deutsch, 1949,
between domestic and international problems. The interna- 1962; Johnson, 1970; Watson & Johnson, 1972). Positive in-
tional affairs of one country are the internal affairs of other terdependence tends to result in promotive interaction
nations. Therefore, future citizens and world leaders must where individuals promote each other’s success, negative in-
understand the nature of interdependent systems and how terdependence tends to result in oppositional or contrient
to operate effectively within them. In the 21st Century peo- interaction where individuals block or obstruct each other’s
ple need the skills to launch and maintain cooperative efforts efforts to succeed, and no interdependence results in an ab-
to manage the increasing interdependence among regions, sence of interaction.
countries, organizations, communities, and individuals. Depending on whether individuals promote or obstruct
Schools may be the primary setting in which individuals will each other's goal accomplishments, there is substitutability
learn how to do so, primarily through participating in coop- (i.e., the degree to which actions of one person substitute for

anales de psicología, 2014, vol. 30, nº 3 (octubre)

 Cooperative Learning in 21st Century 845

the actions of another person), cathexis (i.e., an investment er, expectations of being grouped together, and differentia-
of psychological energy in objects outside of oneself, such as tion from other competing groups. Boundary interdepend-
friends, family, and work), and inducibility (i.e., the openness ence thus includes outside enemy (i.e., negative interdepend-
to being influenced and to influencing others) (Deutsch, ence with another group), identity (which binds group
1949). In cooperative situations, collaborators’ actions tend members together as an entity), and environmental (such as
to substitute for each other, collaborators invest positive a specific work area) interdependence (which are overlap-
emotions in each other, and collaborators are open to being ping and not independent from each other).
influenced by each other. In competitive situations, compet- The second basic element is individual accountability,
itors’ actions do not substitute for each other, competitors which exists when the performance of each individual stu-
invest negative emotions in each other, and competitors are dent is assessed and the results given back to the group and
closed to being influenced by each other. In individualistic the individual (Johnson & Johnson, 1989). Each group
situations, there is no substitutability, cathexis, or inducibil- member has a personal responsibility for completing one's
ity. share of the work and facilitating the work of other group
members. Group members also need to know (a) who
What Makes Cooperation Work needs more assistance, support, and encouragement in com-
pleting the assignment and (b) that they cannot “hitch-hike”
Not all group efforts are cooperative. Simply placing in- on the work of others. The purpose of cooperative learning
dividuals in groups and telling them to work together does is to make each member a stronger individual in his or her
not in and of itself result in cooperative efforts. There are right. Students learn together so that they can subsequently
many ways in which group efforts may go wrong. Seating perform higher as individuals. To ensure that each member
students together can result in competition at close quarters is strengthened, students are held individually accountable to
(pseudo-groups) or individualistic efforts with talking (tradi- complete assignments, learn what is being taught, and help
tional learning groups). Whenever two individuals interact, other group members do the same. Individual accountabil-
however, the potential for cooperation exists. Cooperation, ity may be structured by (a) giving an individual test to each
though, will only develop under a certain set of conditions: student, (b) having each student explain what they have
positive interdependence, individual accountability, promo- learned to a classmate, or (b) observing each group and doc-
tive interaction, social skills, and group processing (Johnson umenting the contributions of each member.
& Johnson, 1974, 1978, 1989, 2005, 2009a). In order to The third basic element is promotive interaction (John-
build and maintain cooperative effects, these five essential son & Johnson, 1989). Students promote each other’s suc-
elements must be carefully structured into the situation. cess by helping, assisting, supporting, encouraging, and
The heart of cooperative efforts is positive interdepend- praising each other’s efforts to learn. Doing so results in
ence (Deutsch, 1949). Positive interdependence is the per- such cognitive processes as orally explaining how to solve
ception that one is linked with others in a way so that one problems, discussing the nature of the concepts being
cannot succeed unless they do (and vice versa) and that learned, teaching one’s knowledge to classmates, challenging
groupmates’ work benefits you and your work benefits them each other’s reasoning and conclusions, and connecting pre-
(Deutsch, 1949, 1962; Johnson & Johnson, 1992). There are sent with past learning. It also results in such interpersonal
three major categories of interdependence: outcome inter- processes as modeling appropriate use of social skills, sup-
dependence, means interdependence, and boundary interde- porting and encouraging efforts to learn, and participating in
pendence (Johnson & Johnson, 1989, 1992). When persons joint celebrations of success.
are in a cooperative or competitive situation, they are orient- The fourth essential element is the appropriate use of
ed toward a desired outcome, end state, goal, or reward. If social skills (Johnson & Johnson, 1989). Contributing to the
there is no outcome interdependence (goal and reward in- success of a cooperative effort requires interpersonal and
terdependence), there is no cooperation or competition. In small group skills. Leadership, decision-making, trust-
addition, the means through which the mutual goals or re- building, communication, and conflict-management skills
wards are to be accomplished specify the actions required on have to be taught just as purposefully and precisely as aca-
the part of group members. Means interdependence includes demic skills. Procedures and strategies for teaching students
resource, role, and task interdependence (which are overlap- social skills may be found in Johnson (2014), Johnson and F.
ping and not independent from each other). Finally, the Johnson (2013), and Johnson and R. Johnson (1997).
boundaries existing among individuals and groups can define The fifth essential element is group processing, the ex-
who is interdependent with whom. Boundary interdepend- amination of the process members are using to maximize
ence consists of abrupt discontinuities that separate and seg- their own and each other’s learning so that ways to improve
regate groups from each other, as well as unify the members the process may be identified (Johnson & Johnson, 1989).
of any one group. The discontinuity may be created by en- Instructors need to focus students on the continuous im-
vironmental factors (different parts of the room or different provement of the quality of the processes students are using
rooms), similarity (all seated together or wearing the same to learn by asking group members to (a) describe what
color shirt), proximity (seated together), past history togeth- member actions are helpful and unhelpful in ensuring that

anales de psicología, 2014, vol. 30, nº 3 (octubre)

846 David W. Johnson and Roger T. Johnson

all group members are achieving and effective working rela- their problems and who do not have caring, supportive help
tionships are being maintained, and (b) make decisions in solving them are at more risk for physical or verbal ag-
about what behaviors to continue or change. Group pro- gression toward stereotyped classmates. Students in cooper-
cessing may result in (a) streamlining the learning process to ative learning groups academically help and assist diverse
make it simpler (reducing complexity), (b) eliminating un- groupmates and contribute to their well-being and quality of
skilled and inappropriate actions (error-proofing the pro- life. This behavior promotes a sense of meaning, pride, and
cess), (c) improving continuously students’ skills in working self-esteem. Finally, the systematic use of cooperative learn-
as part of a team, and (d) celebrating hard work and success. ing provides the context for resolving conflicts in construc-
Understanding how to implement the five essential ele- tive ways, which is essential for positive relationships among
ments enables instructors to (a) structure any lesson in any diverse individuals.
subject area with any set of curriculum materials coopera-
tively, (b) fine-tune and adapt cooperative learning to their International, National, Intergroup, and Interpersonal Decision
specific circumstances, needs, and students, and (c) inter- Making
vene to improve the effectiveness of any group that is mal-
functioning. These five essential elements, furthermore, are As interdependence increases at the international, na-
the heart of cooperation in family, community, organization- tional, community, intergroup, and interpersonal level, so
al, societal, and global interdependence. At every level in does the frequency and intensity of conflicts in collective
which cooperation occurs, these five essential elements need decision making. Conflict results when nations and organi-
to be structured systematically. It is as important to struc- zations have to make decisions about how to work together
ture the five essential elements among nations as it is to to solve mutual (e.g., global) problems. When different par-
structure them among individuals. As global interdepend- ties have different views as to which alternative courses of
ence increases, furthermore, two of the issues that people action need to be followed, constructive controversy results.
will face are increasing diversity and increasing conflicts em- Parties can disagree about the nature and cause of the prob-
bedded in decision making. lems, have different values and goals, and disagree about
how much each should contribute to solving the problem.
Diversity and Pluralism How effectively such decisions are made becomes a central
issue in how effectively global interdependence is managed.
More intense global interdependence is increasing diver- Examples of the issues on which decisions have to be
sity and pluralism on the local level, due to advances in made are the impact of global warming and over population
transportation and ease of moving from one country to an- of the environment. Population estimates predict more than
other. Working cooperatively among diverse individuals will nine billion humans will inhabit the planet by 2050, and the
become a more commonplace need. Cooperative learning ecosystems of the Earth will likely be unable to sustain such
is especially helpful for capitalizing on the benefits of diver- large numbers, especially if humans continue to deplete nat-
sity (Johnson & Johnson, 1989) and ensures that all students ural resources, pollute the environment, and reduce biodi-
are meaningfully and actively involved in learning. Active, versity. With increased population will come economic and
involved students tend not to engage in rejecting, bullying, social conflicts that could devastate the health and well-
or prejudiced behavior. Cooperative learning ensures that being of current and future human populations. The World
students achieve their potential and experience psychological Commission on Environment and Development recognized
success so that they are motivated to continue to invest en- these difficulties in 1987 when it stated, “The Earth is one,
ergy and effort in learning. Those who experience academic but the world is not.” The prevention of such population
failure are at risk for paying no attention and acting up, growth or the dealing with its effects will require coopera-
which often leads to physical or verbal aggression against tion among most nations of the world. The competencies
stereotyped classmates. Cooperative learning promotes the de- students need to learn to deal effectively with such disa-
velopment of caring and committed relationships among greement and conflict are those contained in constructive
students, including between majority and minority students. controversy and integrative negotiations. Teachers can help
Students who are isolated or alienated from their peers and students learn how to make effective collective decisions and
who have no friends are at risk for being targets or sources they can teach the constructive controversy procedure and
of physical or verbal aggression. The negative impact of iso- the competencies needed to do so.
lation may be even more severe on minority students. Engaging in constructive controversies in school teaches
Cooperative learning groups provide an arena in which students the procedures and attitudes necessary for effective
students develop the interpersonal and small-group skills decision making about difficult issues with other coopera-
needed to work effectively with diverse schoolmates. These tors. It begins with randomly assigning students to hetero-
interpersonal skills enable students to engage in discussions geneous cooperative learning groups of four members
in which they share and solve personal problems. As a re- (Johnson & Johnson, 1989, 2007, 2009b). Each group re-
sult, students’ resilience and ability to cope with adversity ceives an issue on which to write a report and pass a test.
and stress will tend to increase. Children who do not share Each cooperative group is divided into two pairs. One pair

anales de psicología, 2014, vol. 30, nº 3 (octubre)

 Cooperative Learning in 21st Century 847

takes the con position on the issue; the other pair takes the and are under obligation to provide leadership and ensure
pro position. Each pair receives the instructional materials effective decisions. All group members are considered
necessary to define their position and point them toward equal. Decisions result from careful consideration of all
supporting information. The materials highlight the cooper- points of view. Group members adopt a set of values that
ative goal of reaching a consensus on the issue (by synthesiz- include contributing to the well-being of their groupmates
ing the best reasoning from both sides) and writing a quality and the common good. All of these characteristics are also
group report. Students then (a) research, learn about, and true of democracies.
prepare their assigned position; (b) present a persuasive case Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and the other found-
that their position is correct; (c) engage in an open discus- ers of the United States of America considered the heart of
sion in which there is spirited disagreement; (d) reverse per- democracy to be political discourse: the formal exchange of
spectives and present the best case for the opposing posi- reasoned views on which of several alternative courses of ac-
tion; (e) agree on a synthesis or integration of the best rea- tion to take to solve a societal problem. Societal problems
soning from both sides; and (f) reflect on the process so that can involve, among other things, poverty, crime, drug abuse,
they may learn from the experience. poor economic health, or racism. Political discourse is a
The research on constructive controversies (compared method of decision making in a democracy. The intent of
with concurrence seeking, debate, and individualistic efforts) political discourse is to involve all citizens in the making of
indicates that it results in higher achievement, greater reten- the decision, persuade others (through valid information and
tion, more creative problem solving, more frequent use of logic), and clarify what course of action would be most ef-
higher-level reasoning and meta-cognitive thought, more fective in solving the problem, The expectation is for citi-
perspective taking, greater continuous motivation to learn, zens to prepare the best case possible rationale for their po-
more positive attitudes toward learning, more positive inter- sition, advocate it strongly, critically analyze the opposing
personal relationships, greater social support, and higher positions, step back and review the issue from all perspec-
self-esteem (Johnson & Johnson, 1989, 2007, 2009b). En- tives, and then come to a reasoned judgment about the
gaging in constructive controversy can also be fun, enjoya- course of action the society should take. The clash of op-
ble, and exciting. posing positions is expected to increase citizens’ understand-
ing of the issue and the quality of decision making, given
Challenge 2: Increasing Number of Democracies that citizens keep an open mind and change their opinions
only when logically persuaded to do so. Engaging in politi-
Due to increasing global interdependence, the spread of cal discourse involves both short-term and long-term posi-
technology and information, and the increasing power of in- tive interdependence. The short-term positive interdepend-
ternational organizations such as the United Nations, the ence is the immediate creation of consensus among citizens
number of democracies will increase throughout the world as to which course of action will best solve the problem.
in the 21st century. In 1748, Charles de Secondat, Baron de The long-term interdependence is the improvement of the
Montesquieu, published The Spirit of Laws in which he ex- political process and the maintenance of the health of the
plored the relationship between people and different forms democracy. Cooperative learning and constructive contro-
of government. He concluded that while dictatorship sur- versy have been used to teach elementary and secondary
vives on the fear of the people and monarchy survives on students how to be citizens in a democracy in such countries
the loyalty of the people, a free republic (the most fragile of as Armenia, Azerbaijan, the Czech Republic, and Lithuania
the three political systems) survives on the virtue of the (Avery, Freeman, Greenwalt, & Trout, 2006; Hovhannisyan,
people. Virtue is reflected in the way a person balances his Varrella, Johnson, & Johnson, 2005).
or her own needs with the needs of the society as a whole.
Motivation to be virtuous comes from a sense of belonging, Digital Citizenship Skills
a concern for the whole, and a moral bond with the com-
munity. The moral bond is cultivated by deliberating with Being a citizen in a democracy not only includes know-
fellow citizens about the common good and helping shape ing how to engage in political discourse with diverse partici-
the destiny of the political community. pants and make effective decisions on major issues, but also
A number of important parallels exist between being an to do so electronically as well as face to face. More and
effective member of a cooperative learning group and being more, participation in a democracy will require citizens to in-
an effective citizen in a democracy (Johnson & Johnson, teract with each other electronically. Having digital citizen-
2010). A cooperative learning group is a microcosm of a ship skills may someday be as important as having interper-
democracy. A democracy is, after all, first and foremost a co- sonal skills. Digital citizenship skills enable individuals to
operative system in which citizens work together to reach engage in cooperative efforts and political discourse and
mutual goals and determine their future. Similarly, in coop- constructive controversies. Much of technology is used to
erative learning groups, individuals work to achieve mutual achieve mutual goals and is, therefore, a tool for cooperative
goals, are responsible for contributing to the work of the endeavors. Technology allows individuals and teams from
group, have the right and obligation to express their ideas, many different locations to coordinate their activities and

anales de psicología, 2014, vol. 30, nº 3 (octubre)

848 David W. Johnson and Roger T. Johnson

access information and other resources almost instantly. soning problems to solve and projects to complete. The se-
Technology also provides access to multitudes of potential cond is for students to engage in constructive controversy.
cooperators and shared spaces. People’s behavior online Step One of teaching students in ways that promote
can even define their identity in their online relationships. their becoming creative entrepreneurs is to structure learn-
The next wave of social networking will move technology ing situations cooperatively and give assignments that re-
systems away from restricting users to walled-off member- quire higher-level reasoning and problem solving. Coopera-
ship in a few sites, such as Facebook, toward a more open tive learning, compared with competitive and individualistic
and flexible sharing among numerous niche communities. learning, tends to increase the number of novel solutions to
This will help individuals to make visible their network of problems, results in the use of more varied reasoning strate-
people they know and are related to independent of any giv- gies, generates more original ideas, and results in more crea-
en address book or networking system. Digital citizenship tive solutions to problems (Johnson, 2003; Johnson & John-
skills thus become an essential aspect of individuals’ lives in son, 1989, 2005, 2009a). In addition, cooperative learning
the 21st century, especially cooperative digital skills. encourages group members to dig into a problem, raise is-
sues, and settle them in ways that show the benefits in a
Challenge 3: The Need for Creative Entrepreneurs wide range of ideas and result in a high degree of emotional
involvement in and commitment to solving the problems.
The economic future of societies depends on their capa- Clearly, a requirement for creativity is to be a member in a
bility to grow, attract, and support talented, innovative, and supportive group that encourages creativity.
creative entrepreneurs (Florida, 2005). Because creative en- In addition to creativity, more frequent discovery and
trepreneurs are highly mobile, countries with the highest development of high-quality cognitive reasoning strategies
quality of life will attract the highest number of creative en- occurs in cooperative environments than in competitive or
trepreneurs. The challenge for educational systems in each individualistic situations (Johnson, 2003; Johnson & John-
country is to produce creative entrepreneurs who will then son, 1989, 2005, 2009a). Studies on Jean Piaget’s cognitive
contribute to the future economic health of the country. development theory and Lawrence Kohlberg’s moral devel-
Nations must first ensure their educational system is so- opment theory indicate that cooperative experiences pro-
cializing students into being creative, productive people who mote the transition to higher-level cognitive and moral rea-
believe that they can better their life through being entre- soning more frequently than competitive or individualistic
preneurs. Nations must also ensure that their quality of life experiences (Johnson & Johnson, 1989). Furthermore, when
is sufficient to attract and keep creative entrepreneurs. Two members of a cooperative group express differences of
factors that largely determine quality of life are the absence opinion, according to Piaget as well as controversy theory,
of poverty and its resulting social problems and the ability of they enhance the level and quality of their cognitive and
individuals potentially to better their lives through becoming moral reasoning. Finally, in cooperative situations, students
entrepreneurs. Education is the key mechanism for individu- tend to engage in more frequent and accurate perspective
als to rise from one social class to another. Thus, schools taking than they do in competitive or individualistic situa-
have the responsibility to teach all students how to be crea- tions. This accurate perspective taking enhances members’
tive problem solvers and maximize their achievement as well ability to respond to others’ needs with empathy, compas-
as ensuring that they go on to post-secondary and graduate sion, and support.
programs. Step Two is to structure constructive controversies (that
Teaching students to be creative is not something many is, students disagreeing with each other and challenging each
schools have achieved in past eras. When schools emphasize other’s conclusions) within the cooperative learning groups.
a model of education as transmission of facts and proce- Constructive controversies tend to increase the number of
dures by teachers in a regimented and structured manner ideas, quality of ideas, feelings of stimulation and enjoyment,
(such as lectures) with the expectation that students will ac- and originality of expression in problem-solving tasks (John-
quire and memorize the information and later recall the in- son & Johnson, 2007, 2009b). In constructive controversies,
formation in an examination situation. What results is a crea- participants tend to invent more creative solutions to prob-
tivity deficit in students. Creativity is the capability to create lems, be more original in their thinking, generate and utilize
or invent something original or to generate unique ap- a greater number of ideas, generate more high-quality ideas,
proaches and solutions to issues or problems (Johnson & F. analyze problems at a deeper level, raise more issues, experi-
Johnson, 2013; Johnson & Johnson, 1989). Creativity is usu- ence greater feelings of stimulation and enjoyment, become
ally a social product advanced through mutual consideration more emotionally involved in and committed to solving the
of diverse ideas in a cooperative context; it does not emerge problem, and experience more satisfaction with the resulting
very well in a competitive or individualistic context. There decision (Johnson & Johnson, 2007, 2009b).
are two steps in promoting the development of creative en-
trepreneurs. The first is to place students in cooperative
learning groups and giving them a series of higher-level rea-

anales de psicología, 2014, vol. 30, nº 3 (octubre)

 Cooperative Learning in 21st Century 849

Challenge 4: Changes in Interpersonal Relationships Second, online relationships are real relationships. Actu-
al people read email messages, respond to comments on a
In the 21st century, the emphasis on friendship for- blog, receive and send Twitter messages, post messages on
mation and positive interpersonal interactions will continue Facebook, and so on. Not only are they real, but they are
to increase. An example is the rise in popularity of social important. Relationships reflect the time individuals spend
networks. Positive relationships will take place with increas- interacting with one another. Many individuals are spending
ing intensity in two settings: face-to-face interactions and more and more relationship time online, often more than
online. The meaning of friendship may be quite different in they spend on face-to-face relationships. More and more
the two settings. Cooperation will, however, play a vital role people are spending as much or more of their relationship
in building positive relationships in each setting, whereas time online than face-to-face.
competition and individualism will tend to result in negative Third, electronic media offer the opportunity to expand
relationships in each setting (Johnson & Johnson, 1989, the number of relationships a person has very quickly and
2005, 2009a). very easily. There are few barriers for entry into online rela-
tionships, and the opportunity to do so is high. A person
Face-To-Face Relationships can use the Internet to find easily other people who have
similar interests and beliefs. Entering one website may pro-
The history of human effectiveness is one of groups of vide access to dozens of people with whom to interact about
humans working together cooperatively to achieve mutual an area of mutual interest. Having such immediate access to
goals. While such cooperation has almost always been face- large numbers of potential friends is difficult if not impossi-
to-face, there is growing emphasis on on-line relationships. ble in face-to- face situations. The ease of creating relation-
There is reason to believe, however, that on-line relation- ships online enhances individuals’ ability to find collabora-
ships will never take the place of face-to-face relationships. tors and identify people who have resources essential for
Studies of business teams and teams in other settings indi- completing cooperative projects.
cate that the most valuable form of communication in in- Fourth, in internet relationships, personal geography
creasing team effectiveness is face-to-face (Johnson & F. tends not to be relevant. No matter where an individual
Johnson, 2013). The more face-to-face interaction among lives, it is possible to find friends all over the world. Thus,
team members, the more effective and higher performing diversity of community may be unimportant to many people
the team tends to be. Face-to-face interaction typically re- because, regardless of who their neighbors are, they can find
quires more engagement, energy, focus, and attention than a community of like-minded people on the internet. Or, if a
do texting, email, talking on the phone, or making entries in neighborhood is too homogeneous for an individual’s tastes,
social networking sites (Pentland, 2012). It is these require- he or she can use the internet to find diverse friends and a
ments, however, that make face-to-face interaction so valua- wide variety of perspectives. Because diverse perspectives
ble and necessary. and resources enhance cooperation and constructive con-
troversy, internet relationships can enhance the quality of
Online Relationships cooperation and constructive controversy considerably.
Fifth, it is easy to interact with lots of people simultane-
Current trends seem to indicate that in the 21st century, ously on the internet. A person can send the same email to
relationships may develop online with increasing frequency. dozens, even hundreds, of people. What a person posts on
Relationships started and maintained through such avenues a Facebook page can be accessed by friends from all over
as websites such as Facebook and MySpace, email, blogging, the world who can then respond. In contrast, most face-to-
texting, tweeting, and online multiplayer games, all of which face relationships are one-on-one. The speed at which
facilitate connections among individuals. Online interaction communication takes place online enhances cooperation and
can be the setting in which new relationships form, supple- coordination of efforts in most cases as long as messages are
ment face- to-face relationships, or maintain previous face- phrased cooperatively. If competitive messages are sent, the
to-face relationships as people move to different geographic speed of communication may alienate more people more
locations. There are several characteristics of online rela- quickly.
tionships. Sixth, in online relationships, people primarily know oth-
First, online relationships tend not to be random, but ra- ers through what they disclose about themselves. There can
ther built around mutual goals and a common purpose. understandably be much scepticism about what people say
People read a blog for a purpose, find people with similar in- about themselves online. In cooperative situations, trust
terests for a reason, and engage in games to have fun and may be higher, as individuals tend to be open, accurate, and
test their skills. The fact that online relationships are built honest in their communications and disclosures. Generally,
on a common purpose makes them by definition coopera- however, the 21st century will no doubt see the develop-
tive. The more people know about cooperative efforts and ment of new ways for assessing individual’s online personas
the more skilled they are in cooperating, the more successful and honesty, such as assessing speed of keyboarding and re-
their online interaction and relationships will be. sponding, cleverness in phrasing responses, patterns of

anales de psicología, 2014, vol. 30, nº 3 (octubre)

850 David W. Johnson and Roger T. Johnson

wording in messages, sense of humor, creativity in writing, oped through voice chat and video provide some nonverbal
and so on. cues such as tone of voice and facial expressions, but they
Seventh, online relationships can be highly positive and do not provide touch (although touch-technology is under
fulfilling. The arrival of email can bring joy. The honest development). Touch is central to human social life. At
disclosure of thoughts and feelings can be liberating. Sup- birth, touch is the most developed sensory modality, and it
port from online friends can be quite powerful. Not all contributes to cognitive, brain, and socio-emotional devel-
online relationships, however, are positive. Cyber-bullying opment through infancy and childhood. Individuals de-
and other negative interactions occur online. Nonetheless, prived of human touch may develop serious psychological
the vast majority of online relationships seem to result in and developmental problems. Touch is essential to the
laughter, good humor, cheerfulness, joy, and fun. emotional experiences in a relationship, because it com-
Material posted on the Internet spreads rapidly and municates and intensifies emotions. Touch is especially im-
widely and may be available to interested parties for decades. portant in communicating positive emotions, such as love,
That means people must concern themselves more with affection, caring, gratitude, empathy, and sympathy. As a
what they post on the internet and its impact on their priva- person has fewer and fewer face-to-face relationships, the
cy in public and face-to-face relationships. For example, be- amount of touch in each relationship may tend to increase.
havior with a friend can be recorded on a cell phone and
sent to dozens of people, and even end up posted on Coping With the Challenges
YouTube. Pictures of a teenager at a party can show up on
a company website twenty years later. In the 21st Century there will be so many technological
Finally, online relationships focus attention on ethics, changes and unforeseen problems that predicting what will
manners, and values. When people develop online relation- occur is difficult. It is safe to predict, however, that increas-
ships, they develop new systems of ethics and manners due ing economic, technological, and environmental global in-
to the nature of the technology. What is polite and what is terdependence will continue to increase and that the result
rude, for example, may be different in online than in face-to- will be a need for greater cooperation and coordination of
face relationships. Online relationships can also affect indi- efforts to deal with the challenges it poses. Issues such as
viduals’ value systems. A recent study found that in the global warming, overpopulation, scarcity of water, mass mi-
United States, Japan, Singapore, and Malaysia, the more grations, and so forth will require most of the world to join
people played a prosocial online game, the more they tended in cooperative efforts to cope with the resulting issues.
to engage in prosocial behavior afterward, and when they Knowing how to build and maintain cooperative systems in
played a violent online game, they were more likely to be- a diverse world will more and more be a requirement, not an
have in competitive, obstructive ways afterward. option. Making democracy work in a wide variety of coun-
tries with markedly different historical heritages will also be
The Impact of Online Interaction on Face-to-Face Relationships a challenge. An essential skill for all citizens and especially
for leaders is constructive political discourse. In order for a
The increasing ease of building and maintaining online country to prosper economically, it must develop, attract,
relationships in the 21st century will have considerable im- and hold onto creative entrepreneurs. Finally, the rise in
pact on face-to-face relationships (Johnson, 2013). First, the technology and the prevalence of on-line relationships will
majority of face-to-face interaction individuals may experi- focus new attention on face-to-face high-quality relation-
ence may take place in school. While at home, many indi- ships and the need for actual contact with other humans. In
viduals may be on the computer communicating with elec- all of these challenges, cooperative learning, including con-
tronic friends and even walking down the street or standing structive controversy, will play a central role in teaching
in line at a store they may be on the phone or texting children, adolescents, and young adults the competencies
friends. It may be that the most face-to-face interaction in and values they need to cope with these and other challenges
children and adolescents’ lives is within schools. and lead productive and fulfilling lives during the 21st centu-
Second, as the amount of time spent in face-to-face rela- ry.
tionships declines, the face-to-face interactions that do occur
may increasingly include touch. Online relationships devel-

References
Avery, P., Freeman, C., Greenwalt, K., & Trout, M. (2006, April). The “delib- NE: University of Nebraska Press.
erating in a democracy project.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Florida, R. L. (2005). The flight of the creative class: The new global competition for
American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. talent. New York: Collins Business.
Deutsch, M. (1949). A theory of cooperation and competition. Human Rela- Hovhannisyan, A., Varrella, G., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (2005). Co-
tions, 2, 129-152. operative learning and building democracies. The Cooperative Link, 20 (1),
Deutsch, M. (1962). Cooperation and trust: Some theoretical notes. In M. 1-3.
R. Jones (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 275-319). Lincoln, Johnson, D. W. (1970). Social psychology of education. New York: Holt, Rine-

anales de psicología, 2014, vol. 30, nº 3 (octubre)

 Cooperative Learning in 21st Century 851

hart, & Winston. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009b). Energizing learning: The instruc-
Johnson, D. W. (2003). Social interdependence: The interrelationships tional power of conflict. Educational Researcher, 38 (1), 37–51.
among theory, research, and practice. American Psychologist, 58, 931-945. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2010). Teaching students how to live
Johnson, D. W. (2014). Reaching out: interpersonal effectiveness and self- in a democracy. In F. Salidi, & R. Hoosain (Eds.), Democracy and multicul-
actualization (11th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. tural education (pp. 201-234). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publish-
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. (2013). Joining together: group theory and group ing.
skills (11th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (in press). Promoting motivation and
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory achievement: The effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualis-
and research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. tic goal structures. Journal of Applied Social Psychology.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1992). Positive interdependence: The heart of co- Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (2013). Cooperation in the
operative learning. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Classroom (9th ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1999). Learning together and alone: Coopera- Montesquieu, C. de (1748/2004). The spirit of laws. New York: Kessinger.
tive, competitive, and individualistic learning (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pentland, A. (2012). The new science of building great teams. Harvard
Prentice Hall. Business Review, 90 (4), 61-70.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2005). New developments in social in- Watson, G., & Johnson, D. W. (1972). Social psychology: Issues and insights (2nd
terdependence theory. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott.
131 (4), 285–358. World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Report of
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2007). Creative controversy: Intellectual chal- the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our common future.
lenge in the classroom (4th ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. New York: United Nations Documents.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009a). An educational psychology suc-
cess story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. (Article received: 5-5-2014; revision received: 9-6-2014; accepted: 12-6-2014)
Educational Researcher, 38 (5), 365–379.

anales de psicología, 2014, vol. 30, nº 3 (octubre)