Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.3.0247

An Analysis on the Roles and Strategies of Imagistic Simulation Observed in Mental Simulation about Problematic Situations of Prediction  

Ko, Min-Seok (Korea National University of Education)
Yang, Il-Ho (Korea National University of Education)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.34, no.3, 2014 , pp. 247-260 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose of this study is to analyze the roles and strategies of imagistic simulation observed in mental simulation about problematic situation of prediction, and thereby identify the process of generating prediction, explanation and sophistication. For this study, a framework for mental simulation process and strategy based on literary research was developed and content was validated from four experts of science education. This study was participated by 10 preliminary elementary school teachers, and a total of 20 cases were gathered for two thought experiment tasks based on the think-aloud method. The results were as follows: First, mental simulation process described based on the seven elements of 'perception,' 'interpretation,' 'statement of initial representation,' 'running imagistic simulation,' 'identifying result of simulation,' 'identifying alignment' and 'restatement structured representation.' The study confirmed that initial representation by interpreting related concepts and running imagistic simulation a number of times to develop explanation and prediction. Second, the study identified the use of strategies to enhance simulation such as 'zoom in,' 'partition,' 'dimensional enhancement,' 'dimensional reduction,' 'remove,' 'replace' and 'extreme case.' Running spatial transformation that uses strategy to enhance simulation contributed to discovering mechanism elements in problematic situations.
Keywords
imagistic simulation; thought experiment; mental modeling; think-aloud method;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Berland, L., & Reiser, B. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26-55.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Stephens, L., & Clement, J. (2010) Documenting the use of expert scientific reasoning process by high school physics students. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 6(2), URL: http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.6.020122.
3 Stieff, M., & Raje, S. (2010). Expert algorithmic and imagistic problem solving strategies in advanced chemistry. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 10(1), 53-81, 2010.   DOI
4 Taylor, K. L., & Dionne, J. P. (2000). Problem-Solving strategy knowledge: the complementary concurrent verbal protocols and retrospective debriefing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 413-425.   DOI
5 Trafton, J. G., Trickett, S. B., & Mintz, F. (2005). Connecting internal and external representations: Spatial transformations of scientific visualizations. Foundations of Science, 10(1), 89-106.   DOI
6 Trickett, S., & Trafton, J. G. (2002). The instantiation and use of conceptual simulations in evaluating hypotheses: Movies in the mind in scientific reasoning. Peoceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Mahwah, NJ.
7 Trickett, S. B., & Trafton, J. G. (2007). "What if...": The use of conceptual simulations in scientific reasoning, Cognitive Science, 31(5), 843-875.   DOI
8 Trickett, S. B., Trafton, J. G., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). How do scientists respond to anomalies? different strategies used in basic and applied science. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(4), 711-729.   DOI
9 Van Someren, M. W., Barnard, Y. F., & Sandberg, J. A. C. (1994). The think aloud method: A practical guide to modeling cognitive processes. San Diego, CA: Academic press.
10 Ramadas, J. (2009). Visual and Spatial Modes in Science Learning. International Journal of Science Education, 31(3), 301-318.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Reiner, M., & Gilbert, J. (2000). Epistemological resources for thought experimentation in science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 22(5), 489-506.   DOI
12 Reiner, M. (1998). Thought experiments and collaborative learning in physics. International Journal of Science Education, 20(9), 1043-1058.   DOI
13 Roberts, M. J., & Newton, E. J. (2003). Individual differences in the development of reasoning strategies. In D. Hardman & L. Macci (Eds.), Thinking: Psychological perspectives on reasoning, judgment, and decision making (pp. 23-43). Chichester: John Wiley.
14 Stephens, L. & Clement, J. (2006). Designing classroom thought experiments: What we can learn from imagery indicators and expert protocols. Proceedings of the NARST 2006 Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA.
15 Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Acher, A., Fortus, D., Shwartz, Y., Hug, B., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 632-654.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Snir, J., Smith, C. L., & Raz, G. (2003). Linking phenomena with competing underlying models: A software tool for introducing students to the particulate nature of matter. Science Education, 87(6), 794-830.   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Steedle, J. T., & Shavelson, R. J. (2009). Supporting valid interpretations of learning progression level diagnoses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 699-715.   DOI
18 Khan, S. (2008). What if scenarios for testing student models in chemistry. In J. Clement & M. A. Rea-Ramirez (Eds.), Model based learning and instruction in science (Chapter. 8, pp. 139-150). Dordrecht: Springer.
19 Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174.   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Lane, R., & Coutts, P. (2012). Student's alternative conceptions of tropical cyclone causes and processes. International Research in Geographical & Environmental Education, 21(3), 205-222.   DOI
21 Moulton, S. T., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2009). Imagining predictions: mental imagery as mental emulation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 364(1521), 1273-1280.   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Nersessian, N. J. (2008). Mental modeling in conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), Interntional handbook of conceptual change (pp. 391-416). New York, NY: Routledge.
23 Mualem, R., & Eylon, B. S. (2010). Junior high school physics: Using a qualitative strategy for successful problem solving. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(9), 1094-1115.   DOI
24 Nersessian, N. J. (2002). The cognitive basis of model-based reasoning in science. In P. Carruthers, S. Stich, & M. Siegal (Eds.), The cognitive basis of science (pp. 133-153). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25 Nersessian, N. J. (1993). In the theoretician's laboratory: Thought experimentation as mental modelling. Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 2, 291-301.
26 Nersessian, N. J. (2009). How do engineering scientists think? model-based simulation in biomedical engineering research laboratories. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 1-28.   DOI
27 Galili, I. (2009). Thought Experiments: Determining Their Meaning. science &Education, 18(1), 1-23.   DOI
28 Gabbard, C. (2012). The role of mental simulation in embodied cognition. Early Child Development and Care, 183(5), 643-650.
29 Gilbert, J., & Reiner, M. (2000). Thought experiments in science education: potential and current realization. International Journal of Science Education, 22(3), 265-283.   DOI
30 Gilbert, J., & Reiner, M. (2004). The symbiotic roles of empirical experimentation and thought experimentation in the learning of physics. International Journal of Science Education, 26(15), 1819-1834.   DOI
31 Kali, Y., Orion, N., & Mazor, E. (1997). Software for assisting high school students in the spatial perception of geological structures, Journal of Geoscience Education, 45(1), 10-21.
32 Gobert, J. D., & Buckly, B. C. (2000). Introduction to model-based teaching and learning in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 891-894.   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Griffith, T. W., Nersessian, N. J., & Goel, A. (2000). Function-follows-form transformations in scientific problem solving. In Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society 22, 196-201. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34 Hegarty, M. (2004). Diagrams in the mind and in the world: Relations between internal and external visualizations. In A. Blackwell et al. (Eds.), Diagrams 2004 Conference Proceedings. LNAI 2980 (pp. 1-13). Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
35 Kali, Y. (2003). A virtual journey within the rock-cycle: A software kit for the development of systems-thinking in the context of the earth's crust. Journal of GeoScience Education, 51(2), 165-170.
36 Bogacz, S., & Trafton, J. G. (2005). Using dynamic and static displays: Using images to reason dynamically. Cognitive Systems Research, 6(4), 312-319.   DOI
37 Botzer, G., & Reiner, M. (2005). Imagery in physics learning - From physicists' practice to naïve students' understanding. In Gilbert, J. K. (Ed.), Visualizations in science education (Vol. 1, pp 147-168). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
38 Brown, J. R. (1991). The Laboratory of the Mind: Thought Experiments in the Natural Sciences. London: Routledge.
39 Clement, J. (2000). Model-based learning as a key research area of science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 1041-1053.   DOI   ScienceOn
40 Clement, J. (2003). Imagistic simulation in scientific model construction. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 25. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
41 Clement, J. (2009). The role of imagistic simulation in scientific thought experiments. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(4), 686-710.   DOI
42 Clement, J. (2008). Creative model construction in scientists and students: The role of imagery, analogy, and mental simulation. Dordrecht: Springer.
43 Christensen, B. T., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The role and impact of mental simulation in design, Cognitive Psychology, 23(3), 327-344.   DOI
44 Dove, J. E., Everett, L. A. & Preece, P. F. W. (1999). Exploring a hydrological concept through children''s drawings. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 485-497.   DOI   ScienceOn
45 Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39-72.   DOI   ScienceOn
46 Ehrlen, K. (2009). Drawings as representations of children's conceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 31(1), 41-57.   DOI
47 Ko, M., & Yang, I. (2013). Analysis on the relationship between the construct level of analogical reasoning and the construction of explanatory model observed in small group discussions on scientific problem solving. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 33(2), 522-537.   과학기술학회마을   DOI
48 Ball, L. J., & Christensen, B. T. (2009). Analogical reasoning and mental simulation in design: Two strategies linked to uncertainty resolution. Design Studies, 30(2), 169-186.   DOI
49 Garcia-Mila, M., & Andersen, C. (2007). Developmental change in notetaking during scientific inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(8), 1035-1058.   DOI   ScienceOn