The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A comparison of students' conceptual understanding of electric circuits in simulation only and simulation‐laboratory contexts
Abstract
The aim of this experimental study was to compare learning outcomes of students using a simulation alone (simulation environment) with outcomes of those using a simulation in parallel with real circuits (combination environment) in the domain of electricity, and to explore how learning outcomes in these environments are mediated by implicit (only procedural guidance) and explicit (more structure and guidance for the discovery process) instruction. Matched‐quartets were created based on the pre‐test results of 50 elementary school students and divided randomly into a simulation implicit (SI), simulation explicit (SE), combination implicit (CI) and combination explicit (CE) conditions. The results demonstrated that the instructional support had an expected effect on students' understanding of electric circuits when they used the simulation alone; pure procedural guidance (SI) was insufficient to promote conceptual understanding, but when the students were given more guidance for the discovery process (SE) they were able to gain significant amount of subject knowledge. A surprising finding was that when the students used the simulation and the real circuits in parallel, the explicit instruction (CE) did not seem to elicit much additional gain for their understanding of electric circuits compared to the implicit instruction (CI). Instead, the explicit instruction slowed down the inquiry process substantially in the combination environment (CE). Although the explicit instruction was able to improve students' conceptual understanding of electrical circuits considerably in the simulation environment, their understanding did not reach the level of the students in the combination environment. These results suggest that when teaching students about electricity, the students can gain better understanding when they have an opportunity to use the simulation and the real circuits in parallel than if they have only a computer simulation available, even when the use of the simulation is supported with the explicit instruction. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 48: 71–93, 2011
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Distribution Theory for Glass's Estimator of Effect Size and Related Estimators
Hedges, L. V. (1981) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164588 · Cited by 5,695
Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains
De Jong, T., & Van Joolingen, W. R. (1998) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543068002179 · Cited by 1,593
Klahr, D., & Nigam, M. (2004) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00737.x · Cited by 977
The Emergence of Abstract Representations in Dyad Problem Solving
Schwartz, D. L. (1995) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0403_3 · Cited by 410
Veermans, K., Joolingen, W. V., & de Jong, T. (2006) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500690500277615 · Cited by 96
Self-citation
Cited by
Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., & Davis, T. J. (2014) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033 · Cited by 2,109
Physical and Virtual Laboratories in Science and Engineering Education
de Jong, T., Linn, M. C., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1230579 · Cited by 1,083
Virtual and remote labs in education: A bibliometric analysis
Heradio, R., de la Torre, L., Galan, D., Cabrerizo, F. J., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Dormido, S. (2016) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.010 · Cited by 574
Olympiou, G., Zacharias, Z., & deJong, T. (2013) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-012-9245-2 · Cited by 132
Riopel, M., Nenciovici, L., Potvin, P., Chastenay, P., Charland, P., Sarrasin, J. B., & Masson, S. (2019) · Studies in Science Education · doi:10.1080/03057267.2019.1722420 · Cited by 127
Metadata
- Authors
- Jaakkola, T., Nurmi, S., & Veermans, K.
- Venue
- Journal of Research in Science Teaching
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-12-22
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 71-93
- ISSN
- 0022-4308 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-2736
- OpenAlex
- W1976287441
- Cited by
- 225
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 56.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A comparison of students' conceptual understanding of electric circuits in simulation only and simulation‐laboratory contexts. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/tea.20386
- The paper
- Jaakkola, T., Nurmi, S., & Veermans, K. (2011). A comparison of students' conceptual understanding of electric circuits in simulation only and simulation‐laboratory contexts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20386
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.