Advertisement

PREACTIVATION OF INHIBITORY CONTROL MECHANISMS HINDERS INTUITIVE REASONING

  • Reuven BabaiEmail author
  • Rachel Rosanne Eidelman
  • Ruth Stavy
Article

ABSTRACT

Many students encounter difficulties in science and mathematics. Earlier research suggested that although intuitions are often needed to gain new ideas and concepts and to solve problems in science and mathematics, some of students’ difficulties could stem from the interference of intuitive reasoning. The literature suggests that overcoming intuitive interference is associated with the activation of inhibitory control mechanisms. The goal of the current study was to find out whether indeed the reasoning processes associated with overcoming intuitive interference are different from the ones related to answering correctly in line with the intuition. To do so, we focused on the comparison-of-perimeters of geometrical shapes task that triggers intuitive responses and applied the prime–probe paradigm. High school students were presented with pairs of congruent and incongruent trials of different combinations. The findings showed that previous trial congruity affects response times of the probe. When congruent trials followed incongruent prime, an increase in response time was observed as compared with congruent trials that followed congruent ones, and vice versa. In addition, when congruent trials followed incongruent-equal prime, not only did response time increase but accuracy significantly dropped as well. The current study supports the suggestion that inhibitory control mechanisms play a key role in overcoming intuitive interference, even in adolescence, and points to the importance of enhancing students’ inhibitory control mechanisms.

KEY WORDS

comparison-of-perimeters executive functions inhibitory control mechanisms intuitive interference intuitive reasoning 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aron, A. R., Robbins, T. W. & Poldrack, R. A. (2004). Inhibition and the right inferior frontal cortex. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 170–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Babai, R., Brecher, T., Stavy, R. & Tirosh, D. (2006a). Intuitive interference in probabilistic reasoning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4, 627–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Babai, R., Levyadun, T., Stavy, R. & Tirosh, D. (2006b). Intuitive rules in science and mathematics: A reaction time study. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 37, 913–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Babai, R., Sekal, R. & Stavy, R. (2010a). Persistence of the intuitive conception of living things in adolescence. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19, 20–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Babai, R., Zilber, H., Stavy, R. & Tirosh, D. (2010b). The effect of intervention on accuracy of students’ responses and reaction times to geometry problems. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 185–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dempster, F. N. (1995). Interference and inhibition in cognition: An historical perspective. In F. N. Dempster & C. J. Brainerd (Eds.), Interference and inhibition in cognition (pp. 3–26). New York: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dempster, F. N. & Corkil, A. J. (1999). Interference and inhibition in cognition and behavior: Unifying themes for educational psychology. Educational Psychology Review, 11, 1–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diamond, A., Barnett, W. S., Thomas, J. & Munro, S. (2007). Preschool program improves cognitive control. Science, 318, 1387–1388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Duit, R. (2007). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions and science education: A bibliography, full version March 2007. Retrieved from http://www.ipn.uni-kiel.de/aktuell/stcse/stcse.html.
  11. Houde, O. & Guichart, E. (2001). Negative priming effect after inhibition of number/length interference in a Piaget-like task. Developmental Science, 4, 119–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fischbein, E. (1987). Intuition in science and mathematics. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
  13. Rueda, M. R., Rothbart, M. K., McCandliss, B. D., Saccomanno, L. & Posner, M. I. (2005). Training, maturation, and genetic influences on the development of executive attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 14931–14936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Schirlin, O. & Houde, O. (2007). Negative priming effect after inhibition of weight/number interference in a Piaget-like task. Cognitive Development, 22, 124–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  16. Spieler, D. (2000). Encyclopedia of Psychology, 7, 12–14.Google Scholar
  17. Stavy, R. & Babai, R. (2008). Complexity of shapes and quantitative reasoning in geometry. Mind, Brain, and Education, 2, 170–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Stavy, R. & Babai, R. (2010). Overcoming intuitive interference in mathematics: Insights from behavioral, brain imaging and intervention studies. ZDM Mathematics Education, 42, 621–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Stavy, R., Goel, V., Critchley, H. & Dolan, R. (2006). Intuitive interference in quantitative reasoning. Brain Research, 1073–1074, 383–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Stavy, R. & Tirosh, D. (2000). How students (mis-)understand science and mathematics. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  21. Tipper, S. P. (1985). The negative priming effect: Inhibitory priming by ignored objects. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37A, 571–590.Google Scholar
  22. Tirosh, D. & Stavy, R. (1999). Intuitive rules and comparison tasks. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1, 179–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Reuven Babai
    • 1
    Email author
  • Rachel Rosanne Eidelman
    • 1
  • Ruth Stavy
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Science Education, The Constantiner School of EducationTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael

Personalised recommendations