Publication Date
| In 2026 | 0 |
| Since 2025 | 1 |
Descriptor
| Biology | 1 |
| College Students | 1 |
| Concept Formation | 1 |
| Energy | 1 |
| Evolution | 1 |
| Knowledge Level | 1 |
| Language Usage | 1 |
| Misconceptions | 1 |
| Scientific Concepts | 1 |
| World Views | 1 |
Author
| Catie Nielson | 1 |
| Emma Pitt | 1 |
| Jessica S. Leffers | 1 |
| John D. Coley | 1 |
| Kimberly D. Tanner | 1 |
| Kristin de Nesnera | 1 |
| Michal Fux | 1 |
| Nicole Betz | 1 |
Publication Type
| Journal Articles | 1 |
| Reports - Research | 1 |
Education Level
| Higher Education | 1 |
| Postsecondary Education | 1 |
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Catie Nielson; Emma Pitt; Michal Fux; Kristin de Nesnera; Nicole Betz; Jessica S. Leffers; Kimberly D. Tanner; John D. Coley – CBE - Life Sciences Education, 2025
Previous research has shown that students employ intuitive thinking when understanding scientific concepts. Three types of intuitive thinking--essentialist, teleological, and anthropic thinking--are used in biology learning and can lead to misconceptions. However, it is unknown how commonly these types of intuitive thinking, or cognitive…
Descriptors: Language Usage, College Students, Biology, Scientific Concepts

Peer reviewed
Direct link
