TY - JOUR
T1 - Probability-related naive ideas across physics topics
AU - Hull, Michael Malvern
AU - Jansky, Alexandra Theresia
AU - Hopf, Martin
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - In this literature review, we survey student naive ideas (frequently referred to as 'misconceptions') that plausibly relate, at least in part, to difficulty in understanding probability. We collected diverse naive ideas from a range of topics in physics: Non-linear Dynamics; Cosmology; Thermal Physics; Atomic, Nuclear, and Particle Physics; Elementary Particle Physics; Quantum Physics; and Measurements and Uncertainties. With rare exception, these naive ideas are treated in the literature to be topic-specific. For example, the idea that 'only one measurement is needed because successive measurements will always yield the same result' is treated to be a misconception in Measurements and Uncertainties. In our review, however, we raise the possibility that these diverse naive ideas have something in common: they are enabled, to varying degrees, by the stance that 'random is incompatible with predictions and laws' that researchers in mathematics education have documented. This is important, as it may inform instruction. Namely, it may be the case that it is more effective to treat this underlying cause of student difficulty, rather than the individual naive ideas themselves.
AB - In this literature review, we survey student naive ideas (frequently referred to as 'misconceptions') that plausibly relate, at least in part, to difficulty in understanding probability. We collected diverse naive ideas from a range of topics in physics: Non-linear Dynamics; Cosmology; Thermal Physics; Atomic, Nuclear, and Particle Physics; Elementary Particle Physics; Quantum Physics; and Measurements and Uncertainties. With rare exception, these naive ideas are treated in the literature to be topic-specific. For example, the idea that 'only one measurement is needed because successive measurements will always yield the same result' is treated to be a misconception in Measurements and Uncertainties. In our review, however, we raise the possibility that these diverse naive ideas have something in common: they are enabled, to varying degrees, by the stance that 'random is incompatible with predictions and laws' that researchers in mathematics education have documented. This is important, as it may inform instruction. Namely, it may be the case that it is more effective to treat this underlying cause of student difficulty, rather than the individual naive ideas themselves.
KW - ATOMS
KW - MISCONCEPTIONS
KW - PERCEPTIONS
KW - POINT
KW - PUPILS
KW - Probability
KW - RELIABILITY
KW - SCIENCE
KW - STUDENTS CONCEPTIONS
KW - deterministic
KW - misconceptions
KW - ontologies
KW - random
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85084856755&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/03057267.2020.1757244
DO - 10.1080/03057267.2020.1757244
M3 - Review
SN - 1940-8412
VL - 57
SP - 45
EP - 83
JO - Studies in Science Education
JF - Studies in Science Education
IS - 1
ER -