“…We also captured the theoretical and/or analytical frameworks that were used to analyze chemistry textbooks or design studies around chemistry textbooks . Several frameworks were used in multiple studies that employed theoretical frameworks: Johnstone’s Triangle, ,,,,,,,,, Cognitive Load Theory, ,, Bloom’s Taxonomy, ,, Mayer’s Multimedia Principles, , Ainsworth’s Design, Functions, Tasks (DeFT) Framework, , Robert’s Curriculum Emphases, , and the Framework on Scientific Literacy. , We identified multiple other frameworks that were each used in a single study on chemistry textbooks (e.g., the Information Processing Model, Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development, Kozma and Russel’s Representational Competence, Fink’s Taxonomy of Significant Learning, Han and Roth’s Semiotic Model, Vermunt and Verloop’s Taxonomy of Learning Activities, Wu and Shah’s Five Principles of Textual Diagrams, Constructivism, the Analogy Classification Framework, Bunge’s Five Ontological Categories, Ausubel and Novak’s Meaningful Learning, and others). Importantly, about half of the articles ( n = 39, 49%) did not use any theoretical/analytical frameworks to guide the design of their studies and the interpretation of their findings.…”