Elaborated metaphors support viable inferences about difficult science concepts

Educational Psychology

Volumn 30, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 771-791

  Diehl, Virginia ^a   Reese, Debbie Denise ^b  

^a WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b WHEELING JESUIT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Academic achievement; Instruction; Metaphor; Scaffolding; Science learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 77957090013     PISSN: 01443410     EISSN: 14695820     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01443410.2010.504996     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Anderson, J.R., Reder, L.M., & Simon, H.A. (1998). Radical constructivism and cognitive psychology. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Brookings papers on educational policy: 1998 (pp. 227-255). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
2. Arce de Sanabia, J. (1993). Relative atomic mass and the mole: A concrete analogy to help students understand these abstract concepts. Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 233-234.
3. Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
4. Diehl, V., Sage, A., & Cook, A. (2010, May). Collaborative computer sharing affects flow dimensions with an instructional science learning game. Poster presented at the 2010 Association for Psychological Science, Boston.
5. Dori, Y.J., & Hameiri, M. (2003). Multidimensional analysis system for quantitative chemistry problems: Symbol, macro, micro, and process aspects. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(3), 278-302.
6. Drucker, P. (1968). The age of discontinuity. New York: Harper & Row.
7. Fortman, J.J. (1993). Pictorial analogies IV: Relative atomic weights. Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 235-236.
8. Gabel, D.L. (1999). Improving teaching and learning through chemistry education research: A look to the future. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 548-554.
9. Gabel, D.L., & Sherwood, R.D. (1984). Analyzing difficulties with mole-concept tasks by using familiar analogue tasks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(8), 843-851.
10. Gagné, R.M., Briggs, L.J., & Wager, W.W. (1992). Principles of instructional design (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
11. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.
12. Gentner, D. (1993). From metaphor to analogy in science. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 447-480). New York: Cambridge University Press.
13. Gentner, D., & Markman, A.B. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52(1), 45-56.
14. Gilbert, J.K., Boulter, C.J., & Elmer, R. (2000). Positioning models in science education and in design and technology education. In J.K. Gilbert & C.J. Boulter (Eds.), Developing models in science education (pp. 3-17). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
15. Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. Physics Teacher, 30, 141-158.
16. Holyoak, K.J., Gentner, D., & Kokinov, B.N. (2001). Introduction: The place of analogy in cognition. In D. Gentner, K.J. Holyoak, & B.N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science (pp. 1-20). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17. Johnstone, A.H. (1991). Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7(2), 75-83.
18. Kurtz, K.J., Miao, C.-H., & Gentner, D. (2001). Learning by analogical bootstrapping. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(4), 417-446.
19. Linn, M.C., Eylon, B., & Davis, E.A. (2004). Knowledge integration perspective on learning. In M.C. Linn, E.A. Davis, & P. Bell (Eds.), Internet environments for science education (pp. 29-46). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20. Markman, A.B., & Gentner, D. (1993). Splitting the difference: A structural alignment view of similarity. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 517-535.
21. Merrill, M.D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology, Research, & Development, 50(3), 43-59.
22. Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (2000). The psychology of the child. (H. Weaver, Trans.). New York: Basic Books.
23. Reese, D.D. (2003). Trees of knowledge: Changing mental models through metaphorical episodes and concept maps. In R.E. Griffin, V.S. Williams, & J. Lee (Eds.), Turning trees: Selected readings (pp. 205-214). Blacksburg, VA: International Visual Literacy Association.
24. Reese, D.D. (2007). First steps and beyond: Serious games as preparation for future learning. Journal of Educational Media and Hypermedia, 16(3), 283-300.
25. Reese, D.D. (2008a). Engineering instructional metaphors within virtual environments to enhance visualization. In J.K. Gilbert, M. Nakhleh, & M. Reiner (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (pp. 133-153). New York: Springer.
26. Reese, D.D. (2008b). GaME design for intuitive concept knowledge. In R.E. Ferdig (Ed.), Handbook of research on effective electronic gaming in education (Vol. 3, pp. 1104-1126). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
27. Reese, D.D. (2009). Structure mapping theory as a formalism for instructional game design and assessment. In D. Gentner, K. Holyoak, & B. Kokinov (Eds.), New frontiers in analogy research: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Analoguey (Analoguey '09) (pp. 394-403). Sofia, Bulgaria: New Bulgarian University Press.
28. Reese, D.D. (2010). Games to evoke and assess readiness to learn conceptual knowledge. In R.V. Eck (Ed.), Gaming & cognition: Theories and perspectives from the learning sciences (pp. 227-254). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
29. Reese, D.D., & Coffield, J. (2005). Just-in-time conceptual scaffolding: Engineering sound instructional metaphors. International Journal of Technology, Knowledge, and Society, 1(4), 183-198.
30. Reese, D.D., Diehl, V.A., & Lurquin, J. (2009, May). Metaphor enhanced instructional video game causes conceptual gains in lunar science knowledge. Poster presented at the 2009 Association for Psychological Science Annual Convention, San Francisco.
31. Richland, L.E., Zut, O., & Holyoak, K.J. (2007). Cognitive supports for analogs in the mathematics classroom. Science, 316, 1128-1129.
32. Schwartz, D.L., & Bransford, J.D. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 475-522.
33. Schwartz, D.L., & Martin, T. (2004). Inventing to prepare for future learning: The hidden efficiency of encouraging original student production in statistics instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 22(2), 129-184.
34. Smith, P.L., & Ragan, T.J. (1993). Instructional design (1st ed.). New York: Merrill.
35. Spiro, R.J., Feltovich, P.J., Coulson, R.L., & Anderson, D.K. (1989). Multiple analogies for complex concepts: Antidotes for analogy-induced misconception in advanced knowledge acquisition. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogueical reasoning (pp. 498-531). New York: Cambridge University Press.
36. Stepan, N.L. (1986). Race and gender: The role of analogy in science. Isis, 77(2), 261-277.
37. Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24(4), 535-585.