The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Assessing Students' Misclassifications of Physics Concepts: An Ontological Basis for Conceptual Change
Abstract
Physics novices and experts solved conceptual physics problems involving light, heat, and electric current and then explained their answers. Novices were ninth-grade students with no background in physics; experts were two postgraduates in physics and two advanced physics graduate students. Problems were multiple choice, with one correct response and three alternative responses representing possible misconceptions. For each conceptual physics problem, an isomorphic material-substance problem was constructed by imagining a materialistic conception of the physics topic and creating the resulting version of the problem. In each physics problem, one of the incorrect choices corresponded to the correct choice in the isomorphic material-substance problem. The empirical question was whether novices would reason about the physics problem as if it were conceptually similar to the substance isomorph. This question was addressed by comparing subjects' responses in the problem pairs, as well as by examining their explanations concerning all problems. A content analysis of subjects' explanations revealed that physics novices were strongly inclined to conceptualize physics concepts as material substances, whereas expert protocols revealed distinctly nonmaterialistic representations. A theory of conceptual change involving ontologically distinct categories is substantiated by these findings.
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
Concepts, Kinds, and Cognitive Development
Keil, F. C. (1989) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/2065.001.0001 · Cited by 1,886
Cited by
Commonsense Conceptions of Emergent Processes: Why Some Misconceptions Are Robust
Chi, M. T. H. (2005) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1402_1 · Cited by 894
When Are Tutorial Dialogues More Effective Than Reading?
VanLehn, K., Graesser, A. C., Jackson, G. T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., & Rosé, C. P. (2007) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1080/03640210709336984 · Cited by 378
Metadata
- Authors
- Slotta, J. D., Chi, M. T. H., & Joram, E.
- Venue
- Cognition and Instruction
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1995-09
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 373-400
- ISSN
- 0737-0008 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-690X
- OpenAlex
- W2081977225
- Cited by
- 247
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 18.16
- 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: Assessing Students' Misclassifications of Physics Concepts: An Ontological Basis for Conceptual Change. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s1532690xci1303_2
- The paper
- Slotta, J. D., Chi, M. T. H., & Joram, E. (1995). Assessing Students' Misclassifications of Physics Concepts: An Ontological Basis for Conceptual Change. Cognition and Instruction. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1303_2
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.