The Effect of Perspective on Misconceptions in Psychology: A Test of Conceptual Change Theory.

E. Amsel, Adam T. Johnston, E. Alvarado, John W. Kettering, Lauren Rankin, Melissa K. Ward
{"title":"The Effect of Perspective on Misconceptions in Psychology: A Test of Conceptual Change Theory.","authors":"E. Amsel, Adam T. Johnston, E. Alvarado, John W. Kettering, Lauren Rankin, Melissa K. Ward","doi":"10.1037/e626972012-011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To test whether students' knowledge about psychology undergoes a conceptual change when learning about the discipline, 227 Introductory Psychology students from six different classes were given the Psychology as a Science (PAS) Scale in one of two conditions. Students were randomly assigned to complete the questionnaire from their own (Self Condition) or their psychology professor's (Professor Condition) perspective. As predicted, results show scores on the PAS Scale were higher, reflecting greater appreciation for psychology as a science, in the Psychology Professor than the Self condition. These results suggest that learning psychology may be less about \"reflecting on and revising\" misconceptions and more about \"sorting out\" which beliefs are associated with scientific psychology and which with students' own intuitive understanding of the discipline. ********** To account for how students learn science disciplines, Posner, Strike, Hewson, and Gertzog (1982) proposed Conceptual Change theory, based on the idea that science learning is a rational and intelligible process (also see Carey, 2000; Duit, 2003; Nesessian, 1989; Strike & Posner, 1992). The theory states that students' ability to learn a scientific discipline will be limited by their holding disciplinary misconceptions, that is, beliefs that are incompatible with the core concepts of the discipline. It is proposed that in order for learning to occur, students must first critically evaluate misconceptions and revise them to be compatible with the discipline. This account has been applied to students learning many scientific disciplines (Duit, 2003; Carey, 2000). One purpose of the present study is to apply this account to students learning psychology, who often misclassify the discipline as less scientific than physics or astronomy. According to Stanovich (2007), students enter an Introductory Psychology class thinking that Freudian theory is largely what psychology is all about or that pop culture psychologists represent all psychologists in general. Previous research has identified a range of psychological claims which students believe about the discipline despite having been proven false by psychological research (Gardner & Dalsing, 1986; Kowalski & Taylor, 2006; McCutcheon, 1991; McCutcheon, Hanson, Apperson, & Wynn, 1992; Thompson & Zamboanga, 2004). For example, students readily believe that Good hypnotists can force you to do anything they want you to do, and that genius is akin to insanity despite evidence disconfirming such claims (c.f., Gardner & Dalsing, 1986). Furthermore, research suggests that students decrease in their misconceptions as they take more psychology courses (Gardner & Dalsing, 1986; Kowalski & Taylor, 2006; McCutcheon et al., 1992). These studies provide weak evidence for conceptual change as the process by which students learn psychology. The questionnaires used to assess psychology students' misconceptions may have reliability and validity problems. In the studies, some researchers (e.g., Garner & Dalsing, 1986), find higher misconception rates than others (McCutcheon, et al., 1992), suggesting alack of measurement reliability in the misconceptions assessments. Moreover, a number of studies report no relation between students' misconceptions performance and their grade in their psychology classes (McCutcheon, et al., 1992; Thompson & Zamboanga, 2004), which would seem to be a violation of measurement validity if misconceptions are supposed to index a constraint on learning, as theoretically proposed (Posner et al, 1982). Finally, the finding of a decrease in misconceptions rate among students taking a psychology class may be due to instructors specifically addressing and clarifying the misconceptions students held (Kowalski & Taylor 2006). It could be argued that the assessment did not measure how well students are able to critically reflect on and revise misconceptions, as theoretically proposed, but how well they were able to provide the \"correct\" answer that was given to them by their instructor. …","PeriodicalId":379871,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Instructional Psychology","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Instructional Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e626972012-011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

To test whether students' knowledge about psychology undergoes a conceptual change when learning about the discipline, 227 Introductory Psychology students from six different classes were given the Psychology as a Science (PAS) Scale in one of two conditions. Students were randomly assigned to complete the questionnaire from their own (Self Condition) or their psychology professor's (Professor Condition) perspective. As predicted, results show scores on the PAS Scale were higher, reflecting greater appreciation for psychology as a science, in the Psychology Professor than the Self condition. These results suggest that learning psychology may be less about "reflecting on and revising" misconceptions and more about "sorting out" which beliefs are associated with scientific psychology and which with students' own intuitive understanding of the discipline. ********** To account for how students learn science disciplines, Posner, Strike, Hewson, and Gertzog (1982) proposed Conceptual Change theory, based on the idea that science learning is a rational and intelligible process (also see Carey, 2000; Duit, 2003; Nesessian, 1989; Strike & Posner, 1992). The theory states that students' ability to learn a scientific discipline will be limited by their holding disciplinary misconceptions, that is, beliefs that are incompatible with the core concepts of the discipline. It is proposed that in order for learning to occur, students must first critically evaluate misconceptions and revise them to be compatible with the discipline. This account has been applied to students learning many scientific disciplines (Duit, 2003; Carey, 2000). One purpose of the present study is to apply this account to students learning psychology, who often misclassify the discipline as less scientific than physics or astronomy. According to Stanovich (2007), students enter an Introductory Psychology class thinking that Freudian theory is largely what psychology is all about or that pop culture psychologists represent all psychologists in general. Previous research has identified a range of psychological claims which students believe about the discipline despite having been proven false by psychological research (Gardner & Dalsing, 1986; Kowalski & Taylor, 2006; McCutcheon, 1991; McCutcheon, Hanson, Apperson, & Wynn, 1992; Thompson & Zamboanga, 2004). For example, students readily believe that Good hypnotists can force you to do anything they want you to do, and that genius is akin to insanity despite evidence disconfirming such claims (c.f., Gardner & Dalsing, 1986). Furthermore, research suggests that students decrease in their misconceptions as they take more psychology courses (Gardner & Dalsing, 1986; Kowalski & Taylor, 2006; McCutcheon et al., 1992). These studies provide weak evidence for conceptual change as the process by which students learn psychology. The questionnaires used to assess psychology students' misconceptions may have reliability and validity problems. In the studies, some researchers (e.g., Garner & Dalsing, 1986), find higher misconception rates than others (McCutcheon, et al., 1992), suggesting alack of measurement reliability in the misconceptions assessments. Moreover, a number of studies report no relation between students' misconceptions performance and their grade in their psychology classes (McCutcheon, et al., 1992; Thompson & Zamboanga, 2004), which would seem to be a violation of measurement validity if misconceptions are supposed to index a constraint on learning, as theoretically proposed (Posner et al, 1982). Finally, the finding of a decrease in misconceptions rate among students taking a psychology class may be due to instructors specifically addressing and clarifying the misconceptions students held (Kowalski & Taylor 2006). It could be argued that the assessment did not measure how well students are able to critically reflect on and revise misconceptions, as theoretically proposed, but how well they were able to provide the "correct" answer that was given to them by their instructor. …
视角对心理学误解的影响:概念变化理论的检验。
为了测试学生对心理学的了解是否在学习这门学科时经历了概念上的变化,来自六个不同班级的227名心理学入门学生在两种情况下接受了心理学作为一门科学(PAS)量表。学生被随机分配从他们自己(自我条件)或他们的心理学教授(教授条件)的角度来完成问卷。正如预测的那样,结果显示,心理学教授组的PAS量表得分高于自我组,这反映出他们对心理学作为一门科学的欣赏程度更高。这些结果表明,学习心理学可能不是“反思和修正”误解,而是更多地“整理”哪些信念与科学心理学有关,哪些信念与学生自己对学科的直觉理解有关。**********为了解释学生如何学习科学学科,Posner, Strike, Hewson和Gertzog(1982)提出了概念变化理论,该理论基于科学学习是一个理性和可理解的过程(也见Carey, 2000;几文钱,2003;Nesessian, 1989;斯特莱克和波斯纳,1992)。该理论指出,学生学习一门科学学科的能力将受到他们持有的学科误解的限制,即与学科核心概念不相容的信念。有人建议,为了使学习发生,学生必须首先批判性地评估误解,并修改它们以与学科相适应。这种解释已经应用于学生学习许多科学学科(Duit, 2003;凯里,2000)。本研究的目的之一是将这种解释应用于学习心理学的学生,他们经常错误地将这门学科归类为不如物理学或天文学科学。Stanovich(2007)认为,学生进入心理学入门课程时,认为弗洛伊德理论在很大程度上就是心理学的全部内容,或者认为流行文化心理学家代表了所有心理学家。先前的研究已经确定了一系列心理学观点,学生们相信这些观点,尽管这些观点已经被心理学研究证明是错误的(Gardner & Dalsing, 1986;Kowalski & Taylor, 2006;丧心病狂,1991;McCutcheon, Hanson, Apperson, & Wynn, 1992;Thompson & Zamboanga, 2004)。例如,学生们很容易相信优秀的催眠师可以强迫你做任何他们想让你做的事情,而天才类似于精神错乱,尽管有证据反驳这种说法(c.f., Gardner & Dalsing, 1986)。此外,研究表明,随着学生学习更多的心理学课程,他们的误解会减少(Gardner & Dalsing, 1986;Kowalski & Taylor, 2006;McCutcheon et al., 1992)。这些研究为概念变化作为学生学习心理学的过程提供了微弱的证据。用于评估心理学学生误解的问卷可能存在信度和效度问题。在研究中,一些研究人员(如Garner & Dalsing, 1986)发现误解率高于其他人(McCutcheon, et al., 1992),这表明误解评估缺乏测量可靠性。此外,一些研究报告称,学生的误解表现与他们在心理学课上的成绩没有关系(McCutcheon, et al., 1992;Thompson & Zamboanga, 2004),这似乎违反了测量效度,如果错误的概念被认为是对学习的限制,正如理论上提出的那样(Posner et al, 1982)。最后,心理学课学生误解率下降的发现可能是由于教师专门解决和澄清学生持有的误解(Kowalski & Taylor 2006)。有人认为,这种评估并没有像理论上提出的那样,衡量学生批判性反思和修正错误观念的能力,而是衡量他们提供导师给他们的“正确”答案的能力。...
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信