• Open Access

Can dual processing theory explain physics students’ performance on the Force Concept Inventory?

Anna K. Wood, Ross K. Galloway, and Judy Hardy
Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 023101 – Published 28 July 2016

Abstract

According to dual processing theory there are two types, or modes, of thinking: system 1, which involves intuitive and nonreflective thinking, and system 2, which is more deliberate and requires conscious effort and thought. The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) is a widely used and robust three item instrument that measures the tendency to override system 1 thinking and to engage in reflective, system 2 thinking. Each item on the CRT has an intuitive (but wrong) answer that must be rejected in order to answer the item correctly. We therefore hypothesized that performance on the CRT may give useful insights into the cognitive processes involved in learning physics, where success involves rejecting the common, intuitive ideas about the world (often called misconceptions) and instead carefully applying physical concepts. This paper presents initial results from an ongoing study examining the relationship between students’ CRT scores and their performance on the Force Concept Inventory (FCI), which tests students’ understanding of Newtonian mechanics. We find that a higher CRT score predicts a higher FCI score for both precourse and postcourse tests. However, we also find that the FCI normalized gain is independent of CRT score. The implications of these results are discussed.

  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Received 29 March 2016

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.023101

This article is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Physics Education Research

Authors & Affiliations

Anna K. Wood*, Ross K. Galloway, and Judy Hardy

  • Physics Education Research Group, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3FD, United Kingdom

  • *annakwood@physics.org

Article Text

Click to Expand

References

Click to Expand
Issue

Vol. 12, Iss. 2 — July - December 2016

Reuse & Permissions
Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

Authorization Required


×
×

Images

×

Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

×

Log In

Cancel
×

Search


Article Lookup

Paste a citation or DOI

Enter a citation
×