Reasoning Through Instructional Analogies

Cognition and Instruction

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 261-310

  Kapon, Shulamit ^a   diSessa, Andrea A ^a,b  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84863836608     PISSN: 07370008     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/07370008.2012.689385     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Brown, D. E. 1993. Refocusing core intuitions: A concretizing role for analogy in conceptual change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10): 1273-1290.
2. Brown, D. E. 1994. Facilitating conceptual change using analogies and explanatory models. International Journal of Science Education, 16(2): 201-214.
3. Brown, D. E. and Clement, J. 1989. Overcoming misconceptions via analogical reasoning: Abstract transfer versus explanatory model construction. Instructional Science, 18(4): 237-261.
4. Cheng, M. F. and Brown, D. E. 2010. Conceptual resources in self-developed explanatory models: The importance of integrating conscious and intuitive knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 32(17): 2367-2392.
5. Chiu, M. H. and Lin, J. W. 2005. Promoting fourth graders' conceptual change of their understanding of electric current via multiple analogies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(4): 429-464.
6. Clement, J. 1988. Observed methods for generating analogies in scientific problem solving. Cognitive Science, 12(4): 563-586.
7. Clement, J. 1993. Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students' preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10): 1241-1257.
8. Clement, J. 1998. Expert novice similarities and instruction using analogies. International Journal of Science Education, 20(10): 1271-1286.
9. Clement, J. and Brown, D. E. 2008. "Using analogies and models in instruction to deal with students' preconceptions". In Creative model construction in scientists and students: The role of imagery, analogy, and mental simulation, Edited by: Clement, J. J. 139-155. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
10. Clement, J., Brown, D. E. and Zietsman, A. 1989. Not all preconceptions are misconceptions: finding "anchoring conceptions" for grounding instruction on students' intuitions. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5): 554-565.
11. Dagher, Z. R. 1995. Review of studies on the effectiveness of instructional analogies in science education. Science Education, 79(3): 295-312.
12. Dagher, Z. R. and Cossman, G. 1992. Verbal explanations given by science teachers: Their nature and implications. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4): 361-374.
13. diSessa, A. A. 1983. "Phenomenology and the evolution of intuition". In Mental models, Edited by: Gentner, D. and Stevens, A. L. 15-34. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
14. diSessa, A. A. 1988. "Knowledge in pieces". In Constructivism in the computer age, Edited by: Forman, G. and Pufall, P. 49-70. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. diSessa, A. A. 1993. Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2&3): 105-225.
16. diSessa, A. A. 1996. "What do "just plain folk" know about physics". In The handbook of education and human development: New models of learning, teaching, and schooling, Edited by: Olson, D. R. and Torrance, N. 709-730. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
17. diSessa, A. A. 2007. An interactional analysis of clinical interviewing. Cognition and Instruction, 25(4): 523-565.
18. diSessa, A. A., Gillespie, N. M. and Esterly, J. B. 2004. Coherence versus fragmentation in the development of the concept of force. Cognitive Science, 28(6): 843-900.
19. diSessa, A. A. and Sherin, B. L. 1998. What changes in conceptual change?. International Journal of Science Education, 20(10): 1155-1191.
20. diSessa, A. A. and Wagner, J. F. 2005. "What coordination has to say about transfer". In Transfer of learning from a modern multi-disciplinary perspective, Edited by: Mestre, J. 121-154. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
21. Duit, R. 1991. On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. Science Education, 75(6): 649-672.
22. Duit, R., Roth, W. M., Komorek, M. and Wilbers, J. 2001. Fostering conceptual change by analogies-Between Scylla and Charybdis. Learning and Instruction, 11(4-5): 283-303.
23. Dunbar, K. 1997. "How scientists think: On-line creativity and conceptual change in science". In Conceptual structures and processes: Emergence, discovery and change, Edited by: Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M. and Vaid, S. Washington, DC: APA Press.
24. Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D. and Gentner, D. The structure-mapping engine. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Philadelphia, PA. Retrieved fromhttp://qrg.northwestern.edu/papers/Files/QRG_Dist_Files/QRG_1986/Falkenhainer_1986_SME.pdf
25. Forbus, K. D. and Gentner, D. Structural evaluation of analogies: What counts. Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Ann Arbor, MI, Vol. 34, pp.341-348.
26. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L. and Appleton, A. C. 2002. Explicitly teaching for transfer: Effects on the mathematical problem solving performance of students with mathematics disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(2): 90-106.
27. Gentner, D. 1983. Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7(2): 155-170.
28. Gentner, D. 1989. "The mechanisms of analogical learning". In Similarity and analogical reasoning, Edited by: Vosniadou, S. and Ortony, A. 199-241. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29. Gentner, D. 2010. Bootstrapping the mind: Analogical processes and symbol systems. Cognitive Science, 34(5): 752-775.
30. Gentner, D., Brem, S., Ferguson, R. W., Markman, A. B., Levidow, B. B., Wolff, P. and Forbus, K. D. 1997. Analogical reasoning and conceptual change: A case study of Johannes Kepler. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(1): 3-40.
31. Gentner, D. and Colhoun, J. 2010. "Analogical processes in human thinking and learning". In Towards a theory of thinking, Edited by: Glatzeder, B. M., Goel, V. and von Müller, A. 35-48. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
32. Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J. and Thompson, L. 2003. Learning and transfer: A general role for analogical encoding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2): 393-405.
33. Gentner, D. and Markman, A. B. 1997. Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52(1): 45-56.
34. Gick, M. L. and Holyoak, K. J. 1980. Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12(3): 306-355.
35. Gick, M. L. and Holyoak, K. J. 1983. Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15(1): 1-38.
36. Gilbert, S. W. 1989. An evaluation of the use of analogy, simile, and metaphor in science texts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(4): 315-327.
37. Glynn, S. M. and Takahashi, T. 1998. Learning from analogy-enhanced science text. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(10): 1129-1149.
38. Harre, R. 1972. The philosophies of science: An introductory survey, London, UK: Oxford University Press.
39. Harrison, A. G. and Treagust, D. 2006. "Teaching and learning with analogies". In Metaphor and analogy in science education, Edited by: Aubusson, P. J., Harrison, A. G. and Ritchie, S. M. 11-24. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
40. Hofstadter, D. R. 1995. Fluid concepts and creative analogies: Computer models of the fundamental mechanisms of thought, New York, NY: Basic Books.
41. Holyoak, K. J., Lee, H. S. and Lu, H. 2010. Analogical and category-based inference: A theoretical integration with Bayesian causal models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139(4): 702-727.
42. Holyoak, K. J. and Thagard, P. 1989. Analogical mapping by constraint satisfaction. Cognitive Science, 13(3): 295-355.
43. Holyoak, K. J. and Thagard, P. 1995. Mental leaps: Analogy in creative thought, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
44. Ioannides, C. and Vosniadou, S. 2002. The changing meanings of force. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 2(1): 5-62.
45. Kapon, S. and diSessa, A. A. 2010. "Instructional explanations as an interface-The role of explanatory primitives". In American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings: Physics Education Research Conference, Edited by: Sabella, M., Singh, C. and Rebello, S. 1289-192. 189Melville, NY: American Institute of Physics.
46. Keane, M. T. 1996. On adaptation in analogy: Tests of pragmatic importance and adaptability in analogical problem solving. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 49(4): 1062-1085.
47. Kim, I. and Spelke, E. 1992. Infants' sensitivity to effects of gravity on visible object motion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(2): 385-393.
48. Kokinov, B. and French, R. M. 2003. "Computational models of analogy-making". In Encyclopedia of cognitive science, Edited by: Nadel, L. Vol. 1, 113-118. London, UK: Nature Publishing Group.
49. May, D. B., Hammer, D. and Roy, P. 2006. Children's analogical reasoning in a third-grade science discussion. Science Education, 90(2): 316-330
50. Merriam, S. B. 2002. Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
51. Minstrell, J. 1982. Explaining the "at rest" condition of an object. The Physics Teacher, 20(1): 10-14.
52. Nersessian, N. J. 1992. "How do scientists think: Capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science". In Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science, Edited by: Giere, R. N. and Peigl, H. 3-44. Minnieapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
53. Norman, D. 1983. "Some observations on mental models". In Mental models, Edited by: Gentner, D. and Stevens, A. L. 7-14. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
54. Piaget, J. 1977. "The child's conception of physical causality". In The essential Piaget, Edited by: Gruber, H. E. and Vonèche, J. J. 118-153. New York, NY: Basic Books.
55. Piaget, J. and Garcia, R. 1974. Understanding causality, New York, NY: Norton.
56. Richland, L. E., Holyoak, K. J. and Stigler, J. W. 2004. Analogy use in eighth-grade mathematics classrooms. Cognition and Instruction, 22(1): 37-60.
57. Rottman, B. M. and Keil, F. C. 2011. What matters in scientific explanations: Effects of elaboration and content. Cognition, 121: 324-337.
58. Sarantopoulos, P., Tsaparlis, G. and Strong, A. 2004. Analogies in chemistry teaching as a means of attainment of cognitive and affective objectives: A longitudinal study in a naturalistic setting, using analogies with a string social content. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 5(1): 33-50.
59. Spelke, E. S. 1991. "Physical knowledge in infancy: Reflections on Piaget's theory". In The epigenesis of mind: Essays on biology and cognition, Edited by: Carey, S. and Gelman, R. 133-169. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
60. Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Coulson, R. L. and Anderson, D. K. 1989. "Multiple analogies for complex concepts: Antidotes for analogy-induced misconception in advanced knowledge acquisition". In Similarity and analogical reasoning, Edited by: Vosniadou, S. and Ortony, A. 498-531. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
61. Treagust, D. F., Duit, R., Joslin, P. and Lindauer, I. 1992. Science teachers' use of analogies: Observations from classroom practice. International Journal of Science Education, 14(4): 413-422.
62. Vosniadou, S. and Brewer, W. F. 1992. Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24(4): 535-585.
63. Wagner, J. F. 2006. Transfer in pieces. Cognition and Instruction, 24(1): 1-71.
64. Wong, E. D. 1993. Understanding the generative capacity of analogies as a tool for explanation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10): 1259-1272.
65. Yerrick, R. K., Doster, E., Nugent, J. S., Parke, H. M. and Crawley, F. E. 2003. Social interaction and the use of analogy: An analysis of preservice teachers' talk during physics inquiry lessons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5): 443-463.