An EXPERTISE × CONGRUENCY interaction in bilateral dorsal ACC shows the congruency effect on BOLD signal is larger for statements in biology, where participants hold basic expertise, than in physics¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1–r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? An interaction effect between expertise and congruency was found in bilateral dorsal ACC, with the congruency effect higher for biology statements. → Geneviève Allaire-Duquette 2021 q3 i? The interaction is attributed to processing of incongruent statements in biology, where participants have basic expertise. → Geneviève Allaire-Duquette 2021 (2)

Evidence¶

Geneviève Allaire-Duquette 2021¶

Geneviève Allaire-Duquette, Lorie-Marlène Brault Foisy, Patrice Potvin, Martin Riopel, Marilyne Larose, Steve Masson. (2021). An fMRI study of scientists with a Ph.D. in physics confronted with naive ideas in science. npj Science of Learning 6:11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-021-00091-x

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Second-level full-factorial ANOVA (EXPERTISE × CONGRUENCY) on fMRI data of 25 Ph.D. physicists; the interaction cluster was bilateral dorsal ACC, reported in Table 2 at pFWE cluster-level < 0.05.

"As evidence by the interaction effect between expertise and congruence, the main difference between physicists confronting naive ideas in physics and biology lies in the activity of the ACC."

Geneviève Allaire-Duquette 2021 (2)¶

Geneviève Allaire-Duquette, Lorie-Marlène Brault Foisy, Patrice Potvin, Martin Riopel, Marilyne Larose, Steve Masson. (2021). An fMRI study of scientists with a Ph.D. in physics confronted with naive ideas in science. npj Science of Learning 6:11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-021-00091-x

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Direction assessment via t-contrasts in the same 25-participant ANOVA; in biology, incongruent statements recruited left IFG, bilateral ACC, bilateral caudate, right insula, bilateral superior frontal gyrus and right midcingulate gyrus more than congruent ones.

"T-contrasts reveal that the interaction effect is attributed to the activation pattern of processing of incongruent statements in biology for which the participants possess basic expertise."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Prior Knowledge — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it

Related Claims¶

• When physicists with a Ph.D. judge incongruent statements in biology, where they hold basic expertise, activation overlaps with inhibitory-control regions including left IFG, ACC, insula and superior frontal gyrus — related
• Judging incongruent statements that trigger naive ideas recruits left IFG, bilateral superior frontal gyrus and bilateral ACC more than judging matched congruent statements — related
• Scientists with a Ph.D. in physics respond more slowly to incongruent statements than to matched congruent statements, with a response-time increase in physics twice as large as in biology — related
• When physicists with a Ph.D. confront naive ideas in their domain of expertise, MFG and IFG associated with inhibitory control are significantly more activated by incongruent than congruent statements — related
• Naive science ideas are extremely persistent and probably never disappear even after extensive training such as a Ph.D. in physics, so conceptual change as replacement may never truly be achieved — related
• Physicists with a Ph.D. are slightly more accurate judging physics statements than biology statements (d = 0.5) — related