ABSTRACT. Recent research efforts have argued for the persistence of some of students' frequent scientific misconceptions, even after correct answers are produced. Some of these studies, based on the analysis of reaction times, have recorded latencies for counterintuitive or incongruent stimuli compared to intuitive or congruent ones. The proposed interpretations were that prior knowledge survives learning and still coexists with new closer-to-scientific knowledge, producing conflicts that delay correct answers. But these conclusions are based on the assumption that stimuli from different conditions only differ in the presence/absence of interfering misconceptions, which is sometimes, in our opinion, a rather fragile claim. Thus, we have designed a task in which it is possible to test different levels of interference and not only its effects in contrast to another condition. Then, we have used it to see if different intensities of interference produce different levels of conflict. The task tested the persistence of the misconception that "heavy objects sink more than lighter ones". One hundred twenty-eight 14-to 15-year-olds were asked to tell which of the 2 balls presented (3 different materials and 3 different sizes) would "sink more" than the other. Analysis verified the presence of latencies and negative priming. For the most part, results show that the intensity of interference does produce corresponding latencies, which suggests greater conflict and therefore supports the hypothesis of persistence and coexistence of conceptions, even after correct answers are produced, and beyond other plausible effects due to the used stimuli. Prescriptions for theory and teaching are proposed.

While the majority of published research on conceptual change has focused on how misconceptions can be abandoned or modified, some recent research findings support the hypothesis that acquired scientific knowledge does not necessarily erase or alter initial non-scientific knowledge but rather coexists with it. In keeping with this "coexistence claim," this article presents an analysis of scientific understanding in four groups of individuals with varying degrees of expertise (preschoolers, elementary students, secondary students, and science teachers) using a cognitive task on buoyancy. This task allowed us to determine the prevalence of certain conceptions and the interference caused by two possible conceptual distractors with regard to producing accurate answers. Results describe the progression of the desired (scientific) conception with age/expertise as well as the evolution or regression of the statuses of two misconceptions. Results also show that misconceptions continue to interfere with performance even when there is a higher degree of scientific expertise, and that patterns of such interference can be studied. In keeping with these conclusions, we argue for the use of a model of conceptual learning called "conceptual prevalence."

No abstract

No abstract