As the coronavirus pandemic unfolded, the use of the term "Chinavirus" to refer to the virus that causes COVID-19 had societal consequences, resulting in discrimination against individuals of Asian descent. In this study of the language used when talking about COVID-19, we used an emergent thematic analysis to explore the potential for induced perspective taking to inform participants' development of arguments regarding the appropriateness of the term "Chinavirus." The following questions guided our inquiry: (1) What evidence do undergraduates draw on and reason about when prompted to argue for and against the appropriateness of the term "Chinavirus" when referring to the virus that causes COVID-19? and (2) How do undergraduates prompted to argue both sides of the "Chinavirus" controversy use these differing perspectives in formulating their own position statements on the controversy? The large majority of 43 participants (pre-service elementary teachers in a mid-sized university in the Southeastern USA) were able, having undertaken an asynchronous, on-line coronavirus-themed unit, to articulate arguments both for and against referring to the virus responsible for COVID-19 as the "Chinavirus" and to use various perspectives in articulating their own position on the issue. Arguments in favor of the appropriateness of the term "Chinavirus" tended to maintain that as China was the origin of the virus, "Chinavirus" is an appropriate term; a number of undergraduates went further and argued that China was, in one way or another, responsible for the origin of the virus, and that this makes the term "Chinavirus" appropriate. Arguments in favor of the inappropriateness of the term "Chinavirus" mostly maintained that this was discriminatory, even racist, and could be harmful to those of Asian descent. The majority of students ultimately addressed both perspectives in their position statements before arguing for their own standpoints, the overwhelming majority of which concluded that it is inappropriate to call the coronavirus "Chinavirus." We conclude that induced perspective taking has the potential for exposing evidence and reasoning employed by opposing sides of socioscientific issues. Furthermore, given that taking alternative perspectives requires effort that individuals aren't often willing to expend on their own, tasking students with taking alternative perspectives through induced perspective taking could aid their development of functional scientific literacy while increasing the likelihood that progressive dialogue ensues.
