科学学习者对矛盾信息的反应研究综述

IF 4.7 2区教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Studies in Science Education Pub Date : 2021-11-17 DOI:10.1080/03057267.2021.2004006

Patrice Potvin

{"title":"科学学习者对矛盾信息的反应研究综述","authors":"Patrice Potvin","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2021.2004006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article presents a critical and systematic review of the science education research literature that explores the response of learners to contradicting information (anomalous data). The review is framed in the cognitive conflict process model (CCPM) and provides an analysis of (1) the types and frequency of possible responses, (2) the conditions by which cognitive conflict is successfully triggered, and (3) the preliminary conditions that eventually favour conceptual changes. The results conclude, among other things, that anomaly-induced cognitive conflict is rather inefficient if triggered in isolation, without supportive processing activities, or without the initial availability of conceptual alternatives. A prospective synthesis is then provided, supporting Ohlsson’s view of science education activities that concentrate on cognitive utility rather than emphasising on discrediting initial conceptions. A reflection about the integration of such considerations with contemporary issues is also provided.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"59 1","pages":"67 - 108"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Response of science learners to contradicting information: a review of research\",\"authors\":\"Patrice Potvin\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03057267.2021.2004006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article presents a critical and systematic review of the science education research literature that explores the response of learners to contradicting information (anomalous data). The review is framed in the cognitive conflict process model (CCPM) and provides an analysis of (1) the types and frequency of possible responses, (2) the conditions by which cognitive conflict is successfully triggered, and (3) the preliminary conditions that eventually favour conceptual changes. The results conclude, among other things, that anomaly-induced cognitive conflict is rather inefficient if triggered in isolation, without supportive processing activities, or without the initial availability of conceptual alternatives. A prospective synthesis is then provided, supporting Ohlsson’s view of science education activities that concentrate on cognitive utility rather than emphasising on discrediting initial conceptions. A reflection about the integration of such considerations with contemporary issues is also provided.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49262,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Science Education\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"67 - 108\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Science Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.2004006\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.2004006","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 9

摘要

本文对科学教育研究文献进行了批判性和系统的回顾，探讨了学习者对矛盾信息(异常数据)的反应。该综述以认知冲突过程模型(CCPM)为框架，并分析了(1)可能的反应类型和频率，(2)成功触发认知冲突的条件，以及(3)最终有利于概念变化的初步条件。结果表明，如果在孤立的情况下，没有支持性的加工活动，或者没有最初可获得的概念替代，异常引起的认知冲突是相当低效的。然后提供了一个前瞻性的综合，支持Ohlsson关于科学教育活动的观点，即关注认知效用，而不是强调怀疑最初的概念。本文还提供了对这些考虑与当代问题相结合的反思。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Response of science learners to contradicting information: a review of research

ABSTRACT This article presents a critical and systematic review of the science education research literature that explores the response of learners to contradicting information (anomalous data). The review is framed in the cognitive conflict process model (CCPM) and provides an analysis of (1) the types and frequency of possible responses, (2) the conditions by which cognitive conflict is successfully triggered, and (3) the preliminary conditions that eventually favour conceptual changes. The results conclude, among other things, that anomaly-induced cognitive conflict is rather inefficient if triggered in isolation, without supportive processing activities, or without the initial availability of conceptual alternatives. A prospective synthesis is then provided, supporting Ohlsson’s view of science education activities that concentrate on cognitive utility rather than emphasising on discrediting initial conceptions. A reflection about the integration of such considerations with contemporary issues is also provided.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Studies in Science Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-

CiteScore

15.30

自引率

2.00%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： The central aim of Studies in Science Education is to publish review articles of the highest quality which provide analytical syntheses of research into key topics and issues in science education. In addressing this aim, the Editor and Editorial Advisory Board, are guided by a commitment to: maintaining and developing the highest standards of scholarship associated with the journal; publishing articles from as wide a range of authors as possible, in relation both to professional background and country of origin; publishing articles which serve both to consolidate and reflect upon existing fields of study and to promote new areas for research activity. Studies in Science Education will be of interest to all those involved in science education including: science education researchers, doctoral and masters students; science teachers at elementary, high school and university levels; science education policy makers; science education curriculum developers and text book writers. Articles featured in Studies in Science Education have been made available either following invitation from the Editor or through potential contributors offering pieces. Given the substantial nature of the review articles, the Editor is willing to give informal feedback on the suitability of proposals though all contributions, whether invited or not, are subject to full peer review. A limited number of books of special interest and concern to those involved in science education are normally reviewed in each volume.