Advertisement

Science & Education

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 1–31 | Cite as

Learning-Related Changes in Adolescents’ Neural Networks During Hypothesis-Generating and Hypothesis-Understanding Training

  • Jun-Ki Lee
  • Yongju Kwon
Article

Abstract

Fourteen science high school students participated in this study, which investigated neural-network plasticity associated with hypothesis-generating and hypothesis-understanding in learning. The students were divided into two groups and participated in either hypothesis-generating or hypothesis-understanding type learning programs, which were composed of 12 topics taught over a 12-week period. To measure change in student competence and brain networks, a paper & pencil test and an fMRI scanning session were administered before and after the training programs. Unlike the hypothesis-understanding group, a before and after training comparison for the hypothesis-generating group showed significantly strong changes in hypothesis explanation quotients and functional brain connectivity associated with hypothesis-generating. However, for the hypothesis-understanding group, the brain network related to hypothesis-understanding significantly strengthened, not from hypothesis-generating type learning, but from hypothesis-understanding type learning. These findings suggest that for hypothesis-generating and hypothesis-understanding there are at least two specialized brain network systems or processes at work in the brain. Furthermore, hypothesis-generating competence could be developed by appropriate training programs such as teaching by way of active hypothesis generation rather than present passive expository teaching practices.

Keywords

Functional Connectivity Middle Frontal Gyrus Work Memory Training Lingual Gyrus Functional Connectivity Network 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MEST) (Grant No. NRF 2009-0053595).

References

  1. Adair, G. (1984). The Hawthorne effect: A reconsideration of the methodological artifact. Journal of Applied Psychology, 20, 334–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baird, A. A., & Fugalsang, J. A. (2004). The emergence of consequential: Evidence from neuroscience. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 359, 1797–1804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1989). Educational research: An introduction (5th ed.). New York, NY: Longman Inc.Google Scholar
  4. Botvinick, M., & Cohen, J. (1998). Rubber hands ‘feel’ touch that eyes see. Nature, 391, 756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Draganski, B., Gaser, C., Kempermann, G., Kuhn, H. G., Winkler, J., Büchel, C., et al. (2006). Temporal and spatial dynamics of brain structure changes during extensive learning. Journal of Neuroscience, 26, 6314–6317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Evans, A. C., Collins, D. L., Mills, S. R., Brown, E. D., Kelly, R. L., Peters, T. M. (1993). 3D Statistical neuroanatomical model from 305 MRI volumes. In IEEE conference record, nuclear science symposium and medical imaging conference (pp. 1813–1817), San Francisco.Google Scholar
  7. Fisher, H. R. (2001). Abductive reasoning as a way of worldmaking. Foundations of Science, 6, 361–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Flaherty, A. W. (2005). Frontotemporal and dopaminergic control of idea generation and creative drive. The Journal of Comparative Neurology, 493, 147–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Forman, S. D., Cohen, J. D., Fitzgerald, J. D., Eddy, W. F., Mintun, M. A., & Noll, D. C. (1995). Improved assessment of significant activation in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI): Use of a cluster-size threshold. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 33, 636–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Friston, K. J., Frith, C. D., Liddle, P. F., & Frackowiak, R. S. J. (1993). Functional connectivity: The principal component analysis of large (PET) data sets. Journal Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism, 13, 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Friston, K. J., Holmes, A. P., Poline, J. B., Grasby, P. J., Williams, S. C., Frackowiak, R. S., et al. (1995). Analysis of fMRI time-series revisited. Neuroimage, 2, 45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Friston, K. J., Holmes, A. P., & Worsley, K. J. (1999). How many subjects constitute a study? Neuroimage, 10, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fugelsang, J. A., & Dunbar, K. N. (2005). Brain-based mechanisms underlying complex causal thinking. Neuropsychologia, 43, 1204–1213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fugelsang, J. A., Roser, M. E., Corballis, P. M., Gazzaniga, M. S., & Dunbar, K. N. (2005). Brain mechanisms underlying perceptual causality. Cognitive Brain Research, 24, 41–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gaab, N., Gaser, C., & Schlaug, G. (2006). Improvement-related functional plasticity following pitch memory training. Neuroimage, 31, 255–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Green, A. E., Fugelsang, J. A., Kraemer, D. J. M., Shamosh, N. A., & Dunbar, K. N. (2006). Frontopolar cortex mediates abstract integration in analogy. Brain Research, 1096, 125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Haier, R. J., Siegel, B. V, Jr, MacLachlan, A., Soderling, E., Lottenberg, S., & Buchsbaum, M. S. (1992). Regional glucose metabolic changes after learning a complex visuospatial/motor task: A positron emission tomographic study. Brain Research, 570, 134–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hanson, N. R. (1958). Patterns of discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hayes, M. T. (2002). Elementary preservice teachers’ struggles to define inquiry-based science teaching. JSTEd, 13, 147–165.Google Scholar
  20. Jeong, J. S., & Kwon, Y. J. (2006). Definition of scientific hypothesis: A generation or a causal explanation. Journal of the Korean Association Research Science Education, 26, 637–645.Google Scholar
  21. Jin, S., Kwon, Y., Jeong, J., Kwon, S., & Shin, D. (2006a). Differences in brain information transmission between gifted and normal children during scientific hypothesis generation. Brain Cognition, 62, 191–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jin, S., Kwon, Y., Jeong, J., Kwon, S., & Shin, D. (2006b). Increased information transmission during scientific hypothesis generation: Mutual information analysis of multichannel EEG. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 62, 337–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. José, J. C., Diasa, T., de Jesusb, H. P., de Souzab, F. N., & Watts, M. (2005). Teaching for quality learning in chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 1123–1137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jung-Beeman, M. J., Bowden, E. M., Haberman, J., Frymiare, J. L., Liu, S. A., Greenblatt, R., et al. (2004). Neural activity when people solve verbal problems with insight. PLoS Biology, 2, 500–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kammers, M. P. M., de Vignemontb, F., Verhagena, L., & Dijkerman, H. C. (2009). The rubber hand illusion in action. Neuropsychologia, 47, 204–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kang, E. M., Shin, D. H., & Kwon, Y. J. (2006). Development of elementary students’ ability to generate hypothesis knowledge through knowledge generation learning in science. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 25, 257–270.Google Scholar
  27. Kassubek, J., Schmidtke, K., Kimmig, H., Lücking, C. H., & Greenlee, M. W. (2001). Changes in cortical activation during mirror reading before and after training: An fMRI study of procedural learning. Cognitive Brain Research, 10, 207–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Koshino, H., Carpenter, P. A., Minshew, N. J., Cherkassky, V. L., Keller, T. A., & Just, M. A. (2005). Functional connectivity in an fMRI working memory task in high-functioning autism. Neuroimage, 24, 810–821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kuperberg, G. R., Lakshmanan, B. M., Caplan, D. N., & Holcomb, P. J. (2006). Making sense of discourse: An fMRI study of causal inferencing across sentences. Neuroimage, 33, 343–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kwon, Y., Jeong, J., & Park, Y. (2006). Roles of abductive reasoning and prior belief in children’s generation of hypotheses about pendulum motion. Science & Education, 15, 643–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kwon, Y. J., Jeong, J. S., Park, Y. B., & Kang, M. J. (2003). A philosophical study on the generating process of declarative scientific knowledge—focused on inductive, abductive, and deductive process. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 23, 215–228.Google Scholar
  32. Kwon, Y., Lee, J., & Jeong, J. (2007a). Explanation patterns of biological hypotheses generated by science high school students in starch experiments. Secondary Education Research, 55, 275–298.Google Scholar
  33. Kwon, Y. J., Lee, J. K., Shin, D. H., & Jeong, J. S. (2009). Changes in brain activation induced by the training of hypothesis generation skills: An fMRI study. Brain and Cognition, 69, 391–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kwon, Y. J., Shin, D. H., Lee, J. K., & Yang, I. H. (2007b). Brain activation in generating hypothesis about biological phenomena and the processing of mental arithmetic: An fMRI study. Journal Association Research in Science Education, 27, 93–104.Google Scholar
  35. Kwon, Y., Yang, I., & Chung, W. (2000). An explorative analysis of hypothesis-generation by pre-service science teachers. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 20, 29–42.Google Scholar
  36. Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and development of thinking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  37. Lee, J. K. (2009). Dissociation of the brain activation network associated with hypothesis-generating and hypothesis-understanding in biology learning: Evidence from an fMRI study. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Cheongwon, Chungbuk: Korea National University of Education.Google Scholar
  38. Lee, L., Harrison, L. M., & Mechelli, A. (2003). A report of functional connectivity workshop, Dusseldorf 2002. Neuroimage, 19, 457–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lee, J. K., & Kwon, Y. J. (2008). Types of emotion during the hypothesis-generating and hypothesis-understanding process on the biological phenomena. Secondary Education Research, 56(3), 1–36.Google Scholar
  40. Lee, J. K., Kwon, Y. J., & Jeong, J. S. (2006). Brain activities during science teacher’s hypothesis-generating about biological phenomena—An fMRI study. Korean Journal of Biological Education, 34(4), 453–464.Google Scholar
  41. Little, D. M., Klein, R., Shobat, D. M., McClure, E. D., & Thulborn, K. R. (2004). Changing patterns of brain activation during category learning revealed by functional MRI. Cognition Brain Res, 22, 84–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mason, R. A., & Just, M. A. (2004). How the brain processes causal inferences in text—A theoretical account of generation and integration component processes utilizing both cerebral hemispheres. Psychological Science, 15, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mazoyer, B. M., Tzourio, N., Frak, V., Syrota, A., Murayama, N., Levrier, O., et al. (1993). The cortical representation of speech. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 467–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McPherson, G. R. (2001). Teaching & learning the scientific method. The American Biology Teacher, 63, 242–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mizuno, K., Tanaka, M., Ishii, A., Tanabe, H. C., Onoe, H., Sadato, N., et al. (2008). The neural basis of academic achievement motivation. Neuroimage, 42, 369–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Olesen, P. J., Westerberg, H., & Klingberg, T. (2004). Increased prefrontal and parietal activity after training of working memory. Nature Neuroscience, 7, 75–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Parris, B. A., Kuhn, G., Mizon, G. A., Benattayallah, A., & Hodgson, T. L. (2009). Imaging the impossible: An fMRI study of impossible causal relationships in magic tricks. Neuroimage, 45, 1033–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pastor, M. A., Macaluso, E., Day, B. L., & Frackowiak, R. S. J. (2008). Putaminal activity is related to perceptual certainty. Neuroimage, 41, 123–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Qiu, J., Li, H., Yang, D., Luo, Y., Li, Y., Wu, Z., et al. (2008). The neural basis of insight problem solving: An event-related potential study. Brain Cognition, 68, 100–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Roser, M. E., Fugelsang, J. A., Dunbar, K. N., Gazzaniga, M., & Corballis, P. M. (2005). Dissociating processes supporting causal perception and causal inference in the brain. Neuropsychology, 19, 591–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Satpute, A. B., Fenker, D. B., Waldmann, M. R., Tabibnia, G., Holyoak, K. J., & Lieberman, M. D. (2005). An fMRI study of causal judgements. European Journal of Neuroscience, 22, 1233–1238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schmithorst, V. K., & Holland, S. K. (2006). Functional MRI evidence for disparate developmental processes underlying intelligence in boys and girls. Neuroimage, 31, 1366–1379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Smith, E. E., & Jiondes, J. (1997). Working memory: A view from neuroimaging. Cognitive Psychology, 1, 5–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Talairach, J., & Tournoux, P. (1988). Co-Planner stereotaxic atlas of the human brain. New York: Thieme Medical Publisher Inc.Google Scholar
  56. van Someren, M. W., Barnard, Y. F., & Sandberg, J. A. C. (1994). The think-aloud method: A practical guide to modeling cognitive processes. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  57. van Zee, E. H. (2000). Analysis of a student-generated inquiry discussion. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 115–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Virtue, S., Haberman, J., Clancy, Z., Parrish, T., & Jung-Beeman, M. (2006). Neural activity of inferences during story comprehension. Brain Research, 1084, 104–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Westernberg, H., & Klingberg, T. (2007). Changes in cortical activity after training of working memory—a single-subject analysis. Physiology & Behavior, 92, 186–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wolford, G., Miller, M. B., & Gazzaniga, M. S. (2000). The left hemisphere’s role in hypothesis formation. Journal of Neuroscience, 20, 1–4.Google Scholar
  61. Worsley, K. J., & Friston, K. J. (1995). Analysis of fMRI time-series revisited-again. Neuroimage, 2, 173–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Yue, X., Vessel, E. A., & Biederman, I. (2007). The neural basis of scene preferences. Neuroreport, 18, 525–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Science Education, Biology Education MajorChonbuk National UniversityJeonjuRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Biology EducationKorea National University of EducationCheongwonRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations