- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Causal reasoning in understanding Newton’s third law

Cheng Chen1,2, Lei Bao2,*, Joseph C. Fritchman2, and Hemin Ma1,†

  • 1East China Normal University, Faculty of Education, Department of Education & Institute of Schooling Reform and Development, Shanghai 200062, China
  • 2The Ohio State University, Department of Physics, Columbus, Ohio 43210, USA

  • *Corresponding author. bao.15@osu.edu
  • †Corresponding author. hmma@dedu.ecnu.edu.cn
PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010128 – Published 21 April, 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010128

Abstract

Causal reasoning is a fundamental cognitive process that supports a wide range of learning activities such as making predictions and inferences, explaining phenomena, and drawing conclusions. In physics learning, causal reasoning plays an important role in developing conceptual understanding and problem-solving skills. This study builds off the existing work to investigate aspects of students’ causal reasoning in understanding Newton’s third law. Quantitative assessment is conducted to explicitly probe four attributes of causal reasoning including the causal relation between a pair of interaction forces, magnitudes of interaction forces, the time order of interaction forces, and the action-reaction language. Interviews are also conducted to identify details of students’ reasoning pathways. The subjects of this study include high school and college students from China. The results suggest that after instruction on Newton’s third law many students still hold a belief of causal relation between the pair of interaction forces. Further analysis on students’ response patterns and interviews suggests that students’ belief in causality is strongly associated with asymmetries in scenario contexts due to dominant features, the scenario timeline, and the action-reaction language. In addition, the results also demonstrate a progression of four developmental levels of causal reasoning that each reveals a set of unique thinking pathways for using the asymmetries in reasoning to determine causality. The findings of this study suggest that the lack of correct causal reasoning may cause students to develop fragmented conceptual understanding, which should be addressed in future research and instruction. Detailed analysis of the findings and educational implications on assessment and instruction are discussed.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (57)

  1. M. Alonso, Problem solving vs. conceptual understanding, Am. J. Phys. 60, 777 (1992).
  2. W. J. McKeachie, Teaching and Learning in the College Classroom: A Review (National Center for Research to Improve, Ann Arbor, 1986).
  3. R. R. Hake, Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six thousand-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory courses, Am. J. Phys. 66, 64 (1998).
  4. National Research Council, Assessing 21st Century Skills: Summary of a Workshop (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2011).
  5. National Research Council, Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century (The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2012).
  6. L. Bao and K. Koenig, Physics education research for 21st century learning, Discip. Interdiscip. Sci. Educ. Res. 1, 2 (2019).
  7. National Research Council, A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2012).
  8. United States Chamber of Commerce, Bridging the soft skills gap: How the business and education sectors are partnering to prepare students for the 21st century workforce, in Center for Education and Workforce (U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation, Washington, DC, 2017).
  9. L. Bao, T. Cai, K. Koenig, K. Fang, J. Han, J. Wang, Q. Liu, L. Ding, L. Cui, Y. Luo, Y. Wang, L. Li, and N. Wu, Learning and scientific reasoning, Science 323, 586 (2009).
  10. L. Bao and J. C. Fritchman, Assessment of knowledge integration in student learning of Newton’s third law, arXiv:2104.05944.
  11. D. E. Brown, Students’ concept of force: the importance of understanding Newton’s third law, Phys. Educ. 24, 353 (1989).
  12. J. Clement, Students’ preconceptions in introductory mechanics, Am. J. Phys. 50, 66 (1982).
  13. I. A. Halloun and D. Hestenes, The initial knowledge state of college physics students, Am. J. Phys. 53, 1043 (1985).
  14. L. Bao, K. Hogg, and D. Zollman, Model analysis of fine structures of student models: An example with Newton’s third law, Am. J. Phys. 70, 766 (2002).
  15. U. Besson, Some features of causal reasoning: Common sense and physics teaching, Res. Sci. Technol. Educ. 22, 113 (2004).
  16. M. Bunge, Causality. The Place of the Causal Principle in Modern Science (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1959).
  17. F. Halbwachs, Réflexions sur la causalité physique. Causalité linéaire et causalité circulaire, in Les Théories de la Causalité, edited by M. Bunge, F. Halbwachs, T. S. Kuhn, and J. Piaget (PUF, Paris, 1971).
  18. J. Piaget, Causalité et opérations, in Les Explications Causales, edited by J. Piaget and R. Garcia (PUF, Paris, 1971).
  19. R. Harré, The Philosophies of Science (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1972).
  20. J. Ogborn, Approche théorique et empirique de la causalité, Didaskalia 1, 29 (1993).
  21. M. Planck, Vorträge und Erinnerungen (S. Hircel, Stuttgart, 1949).
  22. F. C. Keil, Concepts, Kinds, and Cognitive Development (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1989).
  23. S. Carey, The origin of concepts: Continuing the conversation, in Representation, Memory, and Development: Essays in Honor of Jean Mandler, edited by N. L. Stein, P. J. Bauer, and M. Rabinowitz (Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 2002), pp. 43–52.
  24. R. K. Guenther, Human Cognition (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1998).
  25. W. F. Brewer, C. A. Chinn, and A. Samarapungavan, Explanation in scientists and children, in Explanation and Cognition, edited by F. C. Keil and R. A. Wilson (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2000), pp. 279–298.
  26. S. Carey, On the origin of causal understanding, in Causal Cognition: A Multidisciplinary Debate, edited by D. Sperber, D. Premack, and A. J. Premack (Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK, 1995), pp. 268–302.
  27. R. Corrigan and P. Denton, Causal understanding as a developmental primitive, Dev. Rev. 16, 162 (1996).
  28. P. Thagard, Probabilistic networks and explanatory coherence, Cogn. Sci. Quarterly. 1, 91 (2000).
  29. A. Schlottmann, Perception versus knowledge of cause and effect in children: When seeing, Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 10, 111 (2001).
  30. H. M. Wellman and S. A. Gelman, Knowledge acquisition in foundational domains, in Handbook of Child Psychology: Cognition, Perception and Language (Wiley, New York, 1998), pp. 523–573.
  31. B. Anderson, The experiential Gestalt of causation: A common core to pupils’ preconceptions, Eur. J. Sci. Educ. 8, 155 (1986).
  32. G. Lakoff and M. Johnson, Metaphors We Live By (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1980).
  33. A. Michotte, La perception de la causalité (Vrin, Paris, 1946).
  34. W. Hung and D. H. Jonassen, Conceptual understanding of causal reasoning in physics, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 28, 1601 (2006).
  35. M. Bullock, R. Gelman, and R. Baillargeon, The development of causal reasoning, in The Developmental Psychology of Time, edited by W. Friedman (Academic Press, New York, 1982), pp. 209–254.
  36. H. H. Kelley, The process of causal attribution, Am. Psychol. 28, 107 (1973).
  37. P. W. Cheng, From covariation to causation, Psychol. Rev. 104, 367 (1997).
  38. P. Thagard, Explaining disease: Correlations, causes, and mechanisms, in Explanation and Cognition, edited by F. C. Keil and R. A. Wilson (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2000), pp. 254–276.
  39. D. Psillos and P. Koumaras, Multiple causal modelling of electrical circuits for enhancing, in Learning Electricity and Electronics with Advanced, NATO ASI series F, Vol. 115, edited by M. Caillot (Springer, Berlin, 1993), pp. 57–75.
  40. B. A. Sherwood and R. W. Chabay, Conceptual model for understanding the behaviour of electrical circuits, in Learning Electricity and Electronics with Advanced Educational Technology, NATO ASI Series F, Vol. 115, edited by M. Caillot (Springer, Berlin, 1993), pp. 23–35.
  41. B. A. Sherwood and R. W. Chabay, Matter and Interactions (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2002).
  42. J. Gutwill, J. Frederiksen, and M. Ranney, Seeking the causal connection in electricity: shifting among mechanistic perspectives, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 18, 143 (1996).
  43. D. E. Brown, Using examples and analogies to remediate misconceptions in physics: factors influencing conceptual change, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 29, 17 (1992).
  44. C. Chinn and B. Malhotra, Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks, Sci. Educ. 86, 175 (2002).
  45. M. Mustakim, J. Mansyur, M. Rizal, and S. N. Kaharu, Analysis of students’ causal reasoning in physics problem solving, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1521, 022058 (2020).
  46. L. Viennot, Fundamental patterns in common reasoning: Examples in physics, Tijdschrift voor Didactiek der ft-wetenschappen 12, 89 (1994), http://www.fi.uu.nl/publicaties/literatuur/199402-viennot.pdf.
  47. R. Dai, J. C. Fritchman, Q. Liu, Y. Xiao, and L. Bao, Assessment of student understanding on light interference, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 020134 (2019).
  48. W. Xu, Q. Liu, K. Koenig, J. Fritchman, J. Han, S. Pan, and L. Bao, Assessment of knowledge integtration in student learning of momentum, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 010130 (2020).
  49. L. Bao and E. F. Redish, Model analysis: Assessing the dynamics of student learning, Physical Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 2, 010103 (2006).
  50. L. M. Collins and S. T. Lanza, Latent Class and Latent Transition Analysis (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 2010).
  51. Y. Nie, Y. Xiao, J. C. Fritchman, Q. Liu, J. Han, J. Xiong, and L. Bao, Teaching towards knowledge integration in learning force and motion, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 41, 2271 (2019).
  52. M. Schneider and I. Hardy, Profiles of inconsistent knowledge in children’s pathways of conceptual change, Dev. Psychol. 49, 1639 (2013).
  53. M. Straatemeier, H. L. J. van der Maas, and B. R. J. Jansen, Children’s knowledge of earth: A new methodological and statistical approach, J. Exp. Child Psychol. 100, 276 (2008).
  54. T. J. P. van Schijndel, S. E. van Es, R. K. Franse, B. M. C. W. van Bers, and M. E. J. Raijmakers, Children’s mental models of prenatal development, Frontiers Psychol. 9, 1835 (2018).
  55. G. Schwarz, Estimating the dimension of a model, Ann. Stat. 6, 461 (1978).
  56. J. K. Vermunt and J. Magidson, Latent class analysis, in The Sage Encyclopedia of Social Sciences Research Methods, edited by M. Lewis-Beck, A. Bryman, and T. F. Liao (Sage, Thousand Oakes, 2004), pp. 549–553.
  57. D. A. Linzer and J. Lewis, poLCA: An R package for polytomous variable latent class analysis, J. Stat. Softw. 42, 1 (2011).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010128– Published 21 April, 2021
  • Received 26 December 2020
  • Accepted 29 March 2021
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation