Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Role of Inhibition in Conceptual Learning from Refutation and Standard Expository Texts

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Text is the primary tool to learn disciplinary knowledge in school. Text-based learning is shaped by a complex interplay between the text and reader characteristics. This study examined the role of text structure and inhibition in conceptual learning about energy. Inhibition implies the ability to block dominant but inappropriate responses automatically activated. Eighty-five fourth and fifth graders were randomly assigned to the condition of standard expository text, or the condition of refutation text in a pre-test, post-test, and delayed post-test design. Findings revealed that students progressed from pre- to post-test and maintained the gained knowledge at delayed post-test regardless of text read. Moreover, only for refutation-text readers inhibition, as measured by response times, uniquely predicted conceptual learning at delayed post-test over and above reading comprehension, prior knowledge, and short-term conceptual learning. The study deepens our understanding of the refutation text effect by revealing its association with the ability to activate inhibitory control and suggesting a previously unexplored benefit of the refutation text for learning science concepts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ariasi, N., Hyönä, J., Kaakinen, J., & Mason, L. (2016). An eye-movement analysis of the refutation effect in reading science text. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33, 202–221. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ariasi, N., & Mason, L. (2011). Uncovering the effect of text structure in learning from a science text: An eye-tracking study. Instructional Science, 39, 581–601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-010-9142-5.

  • Babai, R., & Amsterdamer, A. (2008). The persistence of solid and liquid naive conceptions: A reaction time study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 553–559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9122-6.

  • Babai, R., Eidelman, R., & Stavy, R. (2012). Preactivation of inhibitory control mechanisms hinders intuitive reasoning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10, 763–775. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-011-9287-y.

  • Borella, E., Carretti, C., & Pelegrina, S. L. (2010). The specific role of inhibitory efficacy in good and poor comprehenders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 541–552. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219410371676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borella, E., Carretti, B., & Lanfranchi, S. (2013). Inhibitory mechanisms in Down syndrome: Is there a specific or general deficit? Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34, 65−71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2012.07.017.

  • Borella, E., & de Ribaupierre, A. (2014). The role of working memory, inhibition, and processing speed in text comprehension in children. Learning and Individual Differences, 34, 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.05.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braasch, J. L. G., Goldman, S. R., & Wiley, J. (2013). The influences of text and reader characteristics on learning from refutations in science texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 561–578. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brault-Foisy, L. M., Potvin, P., Riopel, M., & Masson, S. (2015). Is inhibition involved in overcoming a common physics misconception in mechanics? Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 4, 26–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2015.03.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broughton, S. H., Sinatra, G. M., & Reynolds, R. E. (2010). The nature of the refutation text effect: An investigation of attention allocation. Journal of Educational Research, 103, 407–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670903383101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carretti, B., Borella, E., Cornoldi, C., & De Beni, R. (2009). Role of working memory in explaining the performance of individuals with specific reading comprehension difficulties: A meta-analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 246–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2008.10.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Slotta, J. D., & de Leeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Learning and Instruction, 4, 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90017-5.

  • Cornoldi, C., & Colpo, G. (2011). Prove di lettura MT2 per la scuola elementare 2 [MT2 tests of reading comprehension for the elementary school]. Florence, Italy: Organizzazioni Speciali.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danielson, R. W., Sinatra, G. M., & Kendou, P. (2016). Augmenting the refutation text effect with analogies and graphics. Discourse Processes, 53, 392–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2016.1166334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dempster, F. N. (1991). Inhibitory processes: A neglected dimension of intelligence. Intelligence, 15, 157–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-2896(91)90028-C.

  • Diakidoy, I. N., Kendeou, P., & Ioannides, C. (2003). Reading about energy: The effects of text structure in science learning and conceptual change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 335–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00039-5.

  • Diakidoy, I. N., Mouskounti, T., Fella, A., & Ioannides, C. (2016). Comprehension processes and outcomes with refutation and expository texts and their contribution to learning. Learning and Instruction, 41, 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.10.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diakidoy, I. N., Mouskounti, T., & Ioannides, C. (2011). Comprehension and learning from refutation and expository texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 46, 22–38. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.46.1.2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dole, J. A., & Sinatra, G. M. (1998). Reconceptualizing change in the cognitive construction of knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 33, 109–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1998.9653294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunbar, K., Fugelsang, J., & Stein, C. (2007). Do naïve theories ever go away? Using brain and behavior to understand changes in concept. In M. C. Lovett & P. Shah (Eds.), Thinking with data: 33rd Carnegie symposium on cognition (pp. 193–206). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Friedman, N. P., & Miyake, A. (2004). The relations among inhibition and interference control functions: A latent-variable analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 101–135. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.133.1.101.

  • Goldberg, R. F., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2009). Developmental “roots” in mature biological knowledge. Psychological Science, 20, 480–487. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02320.x.

  • Guzzetti, B. J., Snyder, T. E., Glass, G. V., & Gamas, W. S. (1993). Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 117–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hynd, C. (2003). Conceptual change in response to persuasive messages. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 291–315). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Kelemen, D., Rottman, J., & Seston, R. (2013). Professional physical scientists display tenacious teleological tendencies: Purpose-based reasoning as a cognitive default. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142, 1074–1083. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendeou, P., & O’Brien, E. J. (2014). The Knowledge Revision Components (KReC) framework: Processes and mechanisms. In D. N. Rapp & J. L. G. Braasch (Eds.), Processing inaccurate information: Theoretical and applied perspectives from cognitive science and the educational sciences (pp. 353–377). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Kendeou, P., & van den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory and Cognition, 35, 1567–1577. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kindt, M., Bierman, D., & Brosschot, J. F. (1996). Stroop versus Stroop: Comparison of a card format and a single-trial format of the standard color-word Stroop task and the emotional Stroop task. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 653–661. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(96)00133-X.

  • Ludwig, C., Borella, E., Tettamanti, M., & de Ribaupierre, A. (2010). Adult age differences in the Stroop-color test: A comparison between an item-by-item and a blocked version. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 51, 135–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2009.09.040.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marzocchi, G. M., Re, A. M., & Cornoldi, C. (2010). Batteria Italiana per l’ADHD [Italian battery for assessing ADHD]. Trento, Italy: Erickson.

  • Mason, L., & Gava, M. (2007). Effects of epistemological beliefs and learning text structure on conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou, A. Baltas, & X. Vamvakoussi (Eds.), Reframing the conceptual change approach in learning and instruction (pp. 165–196). Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, L., Gava, M., & Boldrin, A. (2008). On warm conceptual change: The interplay of text, epistemological beliefs, and topic interest. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 291–309. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.291.

  • Masson, S., Potvin, P., Riopel, M., & Brault Foisy, L.-M. (2014). Differences in brain activation between novices and experts in science during a task involving a common misconception in electricity. Mind, Brain, and Education, 8, 44–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Learning from texts: Effects of prior knowledge and text coherence. Discourse Processes, 22, 247–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539609544975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikkilä-Erdmann, M. (2001). Improving conceptual change concerning photosynthesis through text design. Learning and Instruction, 11, 241–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(00)00041-4.

  • Nichelli, F., Scala, G., Vago, C., Riva, D., & Bulgheroni, S. (2005). Age related trends in Stroop and conflicting motor response task findings. Child Neuropsychology, 11, 431–443. https://doi.org/10.1080/09297040590951569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nigg, J.T. (2000). On inhibition/disinhibition in developmental psychopathology: Views from cognitive and personality psychology and a working inhibition taxonomy. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 220–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.2.220.

  • Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otero, Leon, J. A., & Graesser, A. C. (Eds.). (2002). The psychology of science text comprehension. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palladino, P., Cornoldi, C., De Beni, R., & Pazzaglia, F. (2001). Working memory and updating processes in reading comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 29, 344–354. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potvin, P., Masson, S., Lafortune, S., & Cyr, G. (2015). Persistence of the intuitive conception that heavier objects sink more: A reaction time study with different levels of interference. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13, 21–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9520-6.

  • Qian, G., & Pan, J. (2002). A comparison of epistemological beliefs and learning from science text between American and Chinese high school students. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology. The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 365–385). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salo, R., Henik, A., & Robertson, L. C. (2001). Interpreting Stroop interference: An analysis of differences between task versions. Neuropsychology, 15, 462–471. https://doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.15.4.462.

  • Shallice, T., Marzocchi, G. M., Coser, S., Del Savio, M., Meuter, R. F., & Rumiati, R. (2002). Executive function profile of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Developmental Neuropsychology, 21, 43–71. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326942DN2101_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shtulman, A., & Valcarcel, J. (2012). Scientific knowledge suppresses but does not supplant earlier intuitions. Cognition, 124, 209–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.04.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinatra, G. M., & Broughton, S. W. (2011). Bridging reading comprehension and conceptual change in science education: The promise of refutation text. Reading Research Quarterly, 46, 374–393. https://doi.org/10.1002/RRQ.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tippett, C. D. (2010). Refutational text in science education. A review of two decades of research. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 951–970. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9203-x.

  • van den Broek, P., & Kendeou, P. (2008). Cognitive processes in comprehension of science texts: The role of co-activation in confronting misconceptions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 335–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90018-3.

  • Vosniadou, S., Pnevmantikos, D., Makris, N., Ikospentaki, K., Lepenioti, D., Chountala, A., & Kyrianakis, G. (2015). Executive functions and conceptual change in science and mathematics learning. In R. Dale, C. Jennings, P. P. Maglio, T. Matlock, D. C. Noelle, A. Warlaumont, & J. Yoshimi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society: Mind, Technology, and Society. Pasadena, CA (pp. 2529–2534). Merced, CA: University of California.

  • Wright, I., Waterman, M., Prescott, H., & Murdoch-Eaton, D. (2003). A new Stroop-like measure of inhibitory function development: Typical developmental trends. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 44, 561–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.00145.

  • Zaitchik, D., Iqbal, Y., & Carey, S. (2014). The effect of executive function on biological reasoning in young children: An individual differences study. Child Development, 85, 160–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are very grateful to all the students involved in the study, their parents and teachers, and the school principals.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Developmental Psychology and Socialization, University of Padua, Via Venezia 8, 35131, Padua, Italy

    Lucia Mason, Sonia Zaccoletti & Sara Scrimin

  2. Department of General Psychology, University of Padua, Via Venezia 8, 35131, Padua, Italy

    Barbara Carretti

  3. Department of Psychology, University of Cyprus, 1678, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Irene-Anna N. Diakidoy

Authors
  1. Lucia Mason
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sonia Zaccoletti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Barbara Carretti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sara Scrimin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Irene-Anna N. Diakidoy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucia Mason.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 14.4 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mason, L., Zaccoletti, S., Carretti, B. et al. The Role of Inhibition in Conceptual Learning from Refutation and Standard Expository Texts. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 17, 483–501 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9874-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9874-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation