Michaela A. Meier, Dennis Wambacher, Stephan E. Vogel, Roland H. Grabner
{"title":"naïve与数学和科学中的科学理论之间的干扰:一项比较数学家和非数学家的功能磁共振成像研究","authors":"Michaela A. Meier, Dennis Wambacher, Stephan E. Vogel, Roland H. Grabner","doi":"10.1016/j.tine.2022.100194","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>One frequent learning obstacle in mathematics is conceptual interference. However, the majority of research on conceptual interference has focused on science. In this functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study, we examined the conceptual interference effects in both mathematics and science and the moderating influence of mathematical expertise.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Thirty adult mathematicians and 31 gender-, age-, and intelligence-matched non-mathematicians completed a speeded reasoning tasks with statements from mathematics and science. Statements were either congruent (true or false according to both scientifically and naïve theories) or incongruent (differed in their truth value).</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>Both groups exhibited more errors and a slower response time when evaluating incongruent compared to congruent statements in the science and mathematics task, but mathematicians were less affected by naïve theories. In mathematics, the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex was activated when inhibiting naïve theories, while in science it was the dorsolateral and the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex bilaterally. Mathematical expertise did not moderate the conceptual interference effect at the neural level.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study demonstrates that naïve theories in mathematics are still present in mathematicians, even though they are less affected by them in performance than novices. In addition, the differential brain activation in the mathematics and science task indicates that the extent of inhibitory control processes to resolve conceptual interference depends on the quality of the involved concepts.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46228,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Neuroscience and Education","volume":"29 ","pages":"Article 100194"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949322000229/pdfft?md5=553966f7a17579ae1253ee4b9f6d0d6a&pid=1-s2.0-S2211949322000229-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interference between naïve and scientific theories in mathematics and science: An fMRI study comparing mathematicians and non-mathematicians\",\"authors\":\"Michaela A. Meier, Dennis Wambacher, Stephan E. Vogel, Roland H. Grabner\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tine.2022.100194\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>One frequent learning obstacle in mathematics is conceptual interference. However, the majority of research on conceptual interference has focused on science. In this functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study, we examined the conceptual interference effects in both mathematics and science and the moderating influence of mathematical expertise.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Thirty adult mathematicians and 31 gender-, age-, and intelligence-matched non-mathematicians completed a speeded reasoning tasks with statements from mathematics and science. Statements were either congruent (true or false according to both scientifically and naïve theories) or incongruent (differed in their truth value).</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>Both groups exhibited more errors and a slower response time when evaluating incongruent compared to congruent statements in the science and mathematics task, but mathematicians were less affected by naïve theories. In mathematics, the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex was activated when inhibiting naïve theories, while in science it was the dorsolateral and the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex bilaterally. Mathematical expertise did not moderate the conceptual interference effect at the neural level.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study demonstrates that naïve theories in mathematics are still present in mathematicians, even though they are less affected by them in performance than novices. In addition, the differential brain activation in the mathematics and science task indicates that the extent of inhibitory control processes to resolve conceptual interference depends on the quality of the involved concepts.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46228,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trends in Neuroscience and Education\",\"volume\":\"29 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100194\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949322000229/pdfft?md5=553966f7a17579ae1253ee4b9f6d0d6a&pid=1-s2.0-S2211949322000229-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trends in Neuroscience and Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949322000229\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Neuroscience and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949322000229","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Interference between naïve and scientific theories in mathematics and science: An fMRI study comparing mathematicians and non-mathematicians
Background
One frequent learning obstacle in mathematics is conceptual interference. However, the majority of research on conceptual interference has focused on science. In this functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study, we examined the conceptual interference effects in both mathematics and science and the moderating influence of mathematical expertise.
Methods
Thirty adult mathematicians and 31 gender-, age-, and intelligence-matched non-mathematicians completed a speeded reasoning tasks with statements from mathematics and science. Statements were either congruent (true or false according to both scientifically and naïve theories) or incongruent (differed in their truth value).
Findings
Both groups exhibited more errors and a slower response time when evaluating incongruent compared to congruent statements in the science and mathematics task, but mathematicians were less affected by naïve theories. In mathematics, the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex was activated when inhibiting naïve theories, while in science it was the dorsolateral and the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex bilaterally. Mathematical expertise did not moderate the conceptual interference effect at the neural level.
Conclusion
This study demonstrates that naïve theories in mathematics are still present in mathematicians, even though they are less affected by them in performance than novices. In addition, the differential brain activation in the mathematics and science task indicates that the extent of inhibitory control processes to resolve conceptual interference depends on the quality of the involved concepts.