Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2010.30.8.1097

Analysis of Observation Characteristics by Cognitive Style : MEG Study  

Yang, Il-Ho (Korea National University of Education)
Lee, Soon-Joo (Daejeon Jijok Middle School)
Kim, Eun-Ae (Korea National University of Education)
Lee, So-Ree (Korea National University of Education)
Kwon, Suk-Won (Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.30, no.8, 2010 , pp. 1097-1109 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to analyze the ERF components patterns of observers who have different cognitive styles using magneto-encephalography (MEG). The task was developed based on the CSA (Cognitive Style Analysis) program. Eight right-handed, healthy male college students participated in voluntarily. To investigate college students' ERF components during the task, an MEG system with block design was used to measure magnetic signals in their brains. For examining the observation characteristic by cognitive style, MEG ERF components were analyzed. As a result, four ERF components (M1, M2, M3, M4) were observed. Through the results of this study, the reason for different observation characteristics by cognitive styles was verified in the neurophysiological methods. This study will have implications to establish theories on scientific observation and cognitive styles.
Keywords
observation; cognitive style; wholistic cognitive style; analytic cognitive style; MEG;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Schultz, J., Chuang, L., & Vuong, Q. C. (2008). A dynamic object-processing network: metric shape discrimination of dynamic objects by activation of occipitotemporal, parietal, and Frontal cortices. Cerebral Cortex, 18, 1302-1313.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Padilla, M. J. (1990). Science process skills. National Association of Research in Science Teaching Publication: Research Matters - to the Science Teacher (9004).
3 Gazzaniga, M. S., Ivry, R. B., & Mangun, G. R. (2002). Cognitive neuroscience: The biology of the mind (2nd ed). NY: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc, 62-576.
4 Cabeza, R., & Nyberg, L. (2000). Imaging cognition II: An empirical review of 275 PET and fMRI Studies. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(1), 1-47.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Chalmers, A. F. (1982). What is this thing called science? : an assessment of the nature and status of science and its methods(2nd edition). London: University of Queensland Press.
6 Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9, 97-113.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Purves, D. Brannon, E. M., Cabeza, R., Huettel, S. A., LaBar, K. S., Platt, M. L., & Woldorff, M. G. (2008). Principles of cognitive neuroscience. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.
8 Norris, S. P. (1984). Defining obsevational competence. science education, 68(2), 129-142.   DOI
9 Covill, M., & Pattie, I. (2002). Science skills The building blocks. Investigating, 18(4), 27-30.
10 Norris, S. P. (1985). The philosophical basis of observation in science and science education. Journal of Research in science teaching, 22(9), 817-833.   DOI
11 Macro, C., & McFall, D. (2004). Questions and questioning: Working with young children. Primary Science Review, 83, 4-6.
12 Ahtee, M., Suomela, L., Juuti, K., Lampiselka, J., & Lavonen, J. (2009). Primary school student teachers' views about making observations. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 5(2), 128-141.
13 American Association for the Advancement of Science (1975). Science: A process approach. Lexington, MA: Ginn.
14 Andrew, C. P. (2009). Clinical Magnetoencephalography and Magnetic Source Imaging. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15 Baars, B. J., & Gage, N. M. (2007). Cognition, Brain, and consciousness. London: Academic Press.
16 이용호(2009). 뇌기능 측정을 위한 MEG 기술. 전자공학회지, 36(11), 1223-1232.   과학기술학회마을
17 Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R., & Cox, P. W. (1977). Field dependent and field independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research, 47(1), 1-64.   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Messick, S. (1984). The nature of cognitive styles: Problems and promise in educational practice. Educational Psychology, 19, 59-74.   DOI
19 National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
20 Kolb, B., & Whishaw, I. Q. (2009). Fundamentals of human neuropsychology, 6th edition. New York: Worth Publishers.
21 이용호, 권혁찬, 김기웅, 김진목, 박용기(2002). MEG를 이용한 기능성 뇌질환 진단연구. 한국뇌학회지, 2(2), 79-90.
22 김민경(2009). 초등학생의 인지양식에 따른 생물 과제의 관찰 특성 분석. 한국교원대학교 석사학위 논문.
23 Slotnick, S. D., Moo, L. R., Tesoro, M. A., & Hart, J. (2001). Hemispheric asymmetry in categorical versus coordinate visuospatial processing revealed by temporary cortical deactivation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13, 1088-1096.   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Stern, E. (2005). Pedagogy meets Neuroscience. Science, 310(4), 745.   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Tennant, M. (1988). Psychology and adult learning. London: Routledge.
26 Kosslyn, S. M. (1987). Seeing and imagining in the cerebral hemispheres: A computational approach. Psychological Review, 94, 148-175.   DOI
27 Koutstaal, W., Wagner, A. D., Rotte, M., Maril, A., Buckner, R. L., & Schacter, D. L. (2001). Perceptual specificity in visual object priming: Functional magnetic resonance imaging evidence for a laterality difference in fusiform cortex. Neuropsychologia, 39, 184 199.
28 임채성(1999). 초등학교 아동의 인지양식과 성별에 따른 생물 관찰 특성. 한국생물교육학회지, 27(2), 143-150.
29 허명, Anton E. Lawson, 권용주(1997). 과학적 추론 능력의 발달에서 전두엽 연합령의 역할. 한국과학교육학회지, 17(4), 525-540.
30 William, F. M., & Lisa, S. M. (2001). The Expectancy effect in Secondary school biology laboratory instruction. The American Biology Teacher, 63(4), 246-252.   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Simons, J. S., Koutstaal, W., Prince, S., Wagner, A. D., & Schacter, D. L. (2003). Neural mechanisms of visual object priming: Evidence for perceptual and semantic distinctions in fusiform cortex. NeuroImage, 19, 613 626.
32 Hodson, D. (1986b). The nature of scientific observation. School Science Review, 68, 17-30.
33 Hauk, O., Patterson, K., Woollams, O., Cooper-pye, E., Pulvermuller, F., & Rogers, T. T. (2007). How the Camel Lost Its Hump: The Impact of Object Typicality on Event-related Potential Signals in Object Decision. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(8), 1338-1353.   DOI   ScienceOn
34 Haury, D. L. (2002). Fundamental skills in science: Observation. (Eric Digest EDO-SE- 02-05). Columbus, OH. Educational Resources Information Center.
35 Hodson, D. (1986a). Rethinking the role and status of observation in science education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 18(4), 381-396.   DOI
36 Jonassen, D. H., & Grabowski, B. L. (1993). Handbook of individual differences, learning, and instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlnaum Associates.
37 Rayner, S., & Riding, R. J. (1997). Towards a categorisation of cognitive styles and learning styles. Educational Psychology, 17(1&2), 5-27.   DOI
38 도경수, 박창호, 김성일(2002). 인지에 관한 뇌 연구의 개괄적 고찰, 평가 및 전망. 한국심리학회지: 실험 및 인지, 14(4), 321-343.
39 변정호, 이준기, 권용주(2009). 과학교육에서 제시하는 과학적 관찰의 의미와 과정에 대한 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 29(5), 531-540.   과학기술학회마을
40 Slotnick, S. D., & Schacter, D. L. (2010). Conscious and nonconscious memory effects are temporally dissociable. Cognitive neuroscience, 1(1), 8-15.   DOI   ScienceOn
41 Riding, R. J. (1991). Cognitive styles Analysis user manual. Birmingham: Learning and Training Technology.
42 Harlen, W. (2000). The teaching of science in primary schools. London: David Fulton.
43 Hall, J. (2006). Neuroscience and Education. Education Journal, 84(3), 27-29.
44 Hamann, S., & Canli, T. (2004). Individual differences in emotion processing. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 14, 233-238.   DOI   ScienceOn
45 Hanson, N. R. (1958). Patterns of discovery: An inquiry into the conceptual foundations of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46 Garoff, R. J., Slotnick, S. D., & Schacter, D. L. (2005). The neural origins of specific and general memory: The role of the fusiform cortex. Neuropsychologia, 43, 847-859.   DOI   ScienceOn
47 권석원, 권용주(2009). 생명현상 관찰에서 나타나는 인과적 의문 생성의 ERF 특성: MEG 연구. 과학교육연구지, 33(2), 336-345.
48 David, O., Kiebel, S. J., Harrison, L. M., Mattout, J., Kilner, J. M., & Friston, K. J. (2006). Dynamic causal modeling of evoked responses in EEG and MEG. Neuroimage, 30, 1255-1272.   DOI   ScienceOn
49 Driver, R., Gott, R., Johnson, S., Worsley, C., & Wylie, F. (1982). Science in schools Age 15 : Report No. 1. London : H.M.S.O