Do haptic representations help complex molecular learning?

Science Education

Volumn 95, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 700-719

  Bivall, Petter ^a   Ainsworth, Shaaron ^b   Tibell, Lena A E ^a  

^a LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79958131035     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20439     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Abell, S., & Smith, D. (1994). Analytical induction. International Journal of Science Education, 16, 473-487.
2. Ainsworth, S. E. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183-198.
3. Ainsworth, S. E., Bibby, P., & Wood, D. (2002). Examining the effects of different multiple representational systems in learning primary mathematics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 25-61.
4. Banerjee, A. C. (1995). Teaching chemical equilibrium and thermodynamics in undergraduate general chemistry classes. Journal of Chemical Education, 72(10), 879-881.
5. Barsalou, L. W. (2003). Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(2), 84-91.
6. Bayazit, O. B., Song, G., & Amato, N. M. (2001). Ligand binding with OBPRM and user input. In Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE International Conference on Robotics & Automation (pp. 954-959). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE.
7. Berman, H. M., Westbrook, J., Feng, Z., Gilliland, G., Bhat, T. N., Weissig, H., et al. (2000). The protein data bank. Nucleic Acids Research, 28(1), 235-242.
8. Bivall Persson, P., Cooper, M. D., Jonsson, B-H., Ynnerman, A., Ainsworth, S., & Tibell, L. A. E. (2007). Designing and evaluating a haptic system for biomolecular education. In IEEE-Virtual Reality, 07 (pp. 171-178). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE.
9. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1987). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
10. Chi, M. T. H. (2005). Commonsense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust. Journal of Learning Sciences, 14(2), 161-199.
11. Dang, T., Annaswamy, T. M., & Srinivasan, M. A. (2001). Development and evaluation of an epidural injection simulator with force feedback for medical training. In J. D. Westwood (Ed.), Proceedings of Medicine Meets Virtual Reality (pp. 97-102). Washington, DC: IOS Press.
12. de Jong, T., Ainsworth, S. E., Dobson, M., van der Hulst, A., Levonen, J., Reimann, P., et al., (1998). Acquiring knowledge in science and math: The use of multiple representations in technology based learning environments. In M. W. Van Someren, P. Reimann, H. P. A. Boshuizen, & T. de Jong (Eds.), Learning with multiple representations (pp. 9-40). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
13. Dori, Y. J., & Barak, M. (2001). Virtual and physical molecular modeling: Fostering model perception and spatial understanding. Educational Technology & Society, 4(1), 61-74.
14. Fischer, M. H., & Zwaan, R. A. (2008). Embodied language: A review of the role of the motor system in language comprehension. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(6), 825-850.
15. Friedler, Y., Amir, R., & Tamir, P. (1987). High school students' difficulties in understanding osmosis. International Journal of Science Education, 9(5), 541-551.
16. Garvin-Doxas, K., & Klymkowsky, M. W. (2008). Understanding randomness and its impact on student learning: lessons learned from building the biology concept. CBE Life Sciences Education, 7(2), 227-233.
17. Goodsell, D. S., & Olson, A. J. (1990). Automated docking of substrates to proteins by simulated annealing. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Genetics, 8(3), 195-202.
18. Granheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24, 105-112.
19. Harvey, E., & Gingold, C. (2000). Haptic representation of the atom. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Visualization, 2000 (pp. 232-235). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE.
20. Jacobson, M. J. (2001). Problem solving, cognition, and complex systems: Differences between experts and novices. Complexity, 6(3), 41-49.
21. Jewitt, C. (2008). Multimodal classroom research, AERA Review of Research in Education, 32, 241-267.
22. Jones, M. G., Andre, T., Superfine, R., & Taylor, R. (2003). Learning at the nanoscale: The impact of students' use of remote microscopy on concepts of viruses, scale, and microscopy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 3, 303-322.
23. Jones, M. G., Minogue, J., Tretter, T., Negishi, A., & Taylor, R. (2006). Haptic augmentation of science instruction: Does touch matter? Science Education, 90, 111-123.
24. Kind, V. (2003). Chemical concepts: Chemical bonds. Education in Chemistry, 40(4), 93.
25. Kozma, R., Chin, E., Russell, J., & Marx, N. (2000). The roles of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(2), 105-143.
26. Křenek, A., Černohorský, M., & Kabeláč, Z. (1999). Haptic visualization of molecular model. WSCG'99 Conference (Vol. 1, pp. 133-139). Plzen, Czech Republic: University of West Bohemia Press.
27. Kress, G., Jewitt, C., Ogborn, J., & Tsatsarelis, C. (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: the rhetorics of the science classroom. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
28. Lai-Yuen, S. K., & Lee, Y-S. (2005). Computer-aided molecular design (CAMD) with force-torque feedback. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Computer Aided Design and Computer Graphics (pp. 199-204). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE.
29. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.
30. Marton, F., & Pang, M. F. (2006). On some necessary conditions of learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 193-220.
31. Marton, F., & Tsui, A. (Eds.). (2004). Classroom discourse and the space of learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. Mayer, R. (2005). Principles for reducing extraneous processing in multimedia learning: Coherence, signaling, redundancy, spatial contiguity, and temporal contiguity principles. In R. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 183-200). New York: Cambridge University Press.
33. Morris, G. M., Goodsell, D. S., Halliday, R. S., Huey, R., Hart, W. E., Belew, R. K., & Olson, A. J. (1998). Automated docking using a Lamarckian genetic algorithm and an empirical binding free energy function. Journal of Computational Chemistry, 19(14), 1639-1662.
34. Morris, G. M., Goodsell, D. S., Huey, R., & Olson, A. J. (1996). Distributed automated docking of flexible ligands to proteins: Parallel applications of AutoDock 2.4. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, 10(10), 293-304.
35. Nicoll, G. (2001). A report of undergraduates' bonding misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 707-730.
36. Ochs, R. S. (1996). Thermodynamics and spontaneity. Journal of Chemical Education, 73(10), 952-954.
37. Odom, A. L. (1995). Secondary and college biology students' misconceptions about diffusion and osmosis. The American Biology Teacher, 57, 409-415.
38. Ouh-young, M., Beard, D. V., & Brooks, F. P., Jr. (1989). Force display performs better than visual display in a simple 6-D docking task. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (pp. 1462-1466). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE.
39. Özmen, H. (2004). Some students misconceptions in chemistry. A literature review of chemical bonding. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(2), 147-159.
40. Reiner, M. (1999). Conceptual construction of fields through tactile interface. Interactive Learning Environments, 7(1), 31-55.
41. Reiner, M. (2008). Seeing through touch: The role of haptic information in visualization. In J. K. Gilbert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (pp. 73-84). Berlin: Springer.
42. Reiner, M. (2009). Sensory cues, visualization and physics learning. International Journal of Science Education, 31(3), 343-364.
43. Roth, W. M., & Bowen, G. M. (2003). When are graphs worth ten thousand words? An expert-expert study. Cognition and Instruction, 21(4), 429-473.
44. Rundgren, C-J., Hirsch, R., & Tibell, L. A. E. (2009). Death of metaphors in life science?: A study of upper secondary and tertiary students' use of metaphors and help-words in their meaning-making of scientific content. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 10(3), Article 3. Accessed January 17, 2011, at
45. Rundgren, C-J., & Tibell, L. A. E. (2010). Critical features of visualizations of transport through the cell membrane-An empirical study of upper secondary and tertiary students' meaning-making of still images and an animation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(2), 223-246.
46. Sauer, C. M., Hastings, W. A., & Okamura, A. M. (2004). Virtual environment for exploring atomic bonding. In Eurohaptics '04 (pp. 232-239). Munich, Germany: Institute of Automatic Control Engineering, Technische Universität München.
47. Slotta, J. D., & Chi, M. T. H. (2006). Helping students understand challenging topics in science through ontology training. Cognition and Instruction, 24(2), 261-289.
48. Stieff, M. (2005). Connected chemistry-A novel modeling environment for the chemistry classroom. Journal of Chemical Education, 82(3), 489-493.
49. Subasi, E., & Basdogan, C. (2008). A new haptic interaction and visualization approach for rigid molecular docking in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 17(1), 73-90.
50. Tabachneck-Schijf, H. J. M., & Simon, H. A. (1998). Alternative representations of instructional material. In D. Peterson (Ed.), Forms of representation (pp. 28-46). Exeter, England: Intellect Books.
51. Talmy, L. (1988). Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12, 49-100.
52. Talmy, L. (1995). Cognitive culture systems. Monist, 78(1), 80-115.
53. Talmy, L. (2000). Fictive motion in language and "ception." In Toward a cognitive semantics (Vol. 1, pp. 99-175). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
54. Thomas, P. L., & Schwenz, R. W. (1998). College physical chemistry students' conceptions of equilibrium and fundamental thermodynamics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(10), 1151-1160.
55. van der Meij, J., & de Jong, T. (2006). Supporting students' learning with multiple representations in a dynamic simulation-based learning environment. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 199-212.
56. Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625-636.