Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Nature and Role of Thought Experiments in Solving Conceptual Physics Problems

  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study describes the possible variations of thought experiments in terms of their nature, purpose, and reasoning resources adopted during the solution of conceptual physics problems. A phenomenographic research approach was adopted for this study. Three groups of participants with varying levels of physics knowledge—low, medium, and high level—were selected in order to capture potential variations. Five participants were selected within each level group and the study was conducted with fifteen participants in total. Think aloud and retrospective questioning strategies were used throughout the individually conducted problem solving sessions to capture variations in the participants’ thinking processes. The analysis of the data showed that thought experiments were actively used cognitive tools by participants from all there levels while working on the problems. Four different thought experiment structures were observed and categorized as limiting case, extreme case, simple case, and familiar case. It was also observed that participants conducted thought experiments for different purposes such as prediction, proof, and explanation. The reasoning resources behind the thought experiment processes were classified in terms of observed facts, intuitive principles, and scientific concepts. The results of the analysis suggested that thought experiments used as a creative reasoning tool for scientists can also be a productive tool for students. It was argued that instructional practices enriched with thought experiments and related practices not only reveal hidden elements of students’ reasoning but also provide students opportunities to advance their inquiry skills through thought experimentation processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See for example, Brown (2006), Gendler (2004), Gilbert and Reiner (2000).

  2. See for example, Brown (1986, 1991), Reiner and Burko (2003).

  3. Velentzas et al. (2007), Velentzas and Halkia (2011, 2012).

  4. See for example Åkerlind (2005), Gall et al. (2003), Orgill and Bodner (2007).

  5. See for example Chi and Slotta (1993), diSessa (1993), Vosniadou (1994).

References

  • Åkerlind, G. (2005). Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods. Higher Education Research & Development, 24(4), 321–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashworth, P. D., & Lucas, U. (1998). What is the ‘world’ of phenomenography? Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 42(4), 415–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botzer, G., & Reiner, M. (2005). Imagery in physics learning: From physicists’ practice to naïve students’ understanding. In J. K. Gilbert (Ed.), Visualizations in science education (Vol. 1, pp. 147–168). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. R. (1986). Thought experiments since the scientific revolution. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 1(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. R. (1991). The laboratory of the mind: Thought experiments in the natural sciences. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. R. (2006). The promise and perils of thought experiments. Interchange, 37(1–2), 63–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruce, C., Buckingham, L., Hynd, J., McMahon, C., Roggenkamp, M., & Stoodley, I. (2004). Ways of experiencing the act of learning to program: A phenomenographic study of introductory programming students at university. Journal of Information Technology Education, 3, 143–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryce, T., & MacMillan, K. (2005). Encouraging conceptual change: The use of bridging analogies in the teaching of action reaction forces and the ‘at rest’ condition in physics. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 737–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., & Slotta, J. D. (1993). The ontological coherence of intuitive physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 249–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students’ preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1241–1257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clement, J. (1994a). Imagistic simulation and physical intuition in expert problem solving. In A. Ram & K. Eiselt (Eds.), Proceedings of sixteen annual conferences for cognitive science society (pp. 201–206). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrance Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clement, J. (1994b). Use of physical intuition and imagistic simulation in expert problem solving. In D. Tirosh (Ed.), Implicit and explicit knowledge (pp. 204–244). Hillsdale, NJ: Ablex Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clement, J. (2003). Imagistic simulation in scientific model construction. In R. Alterman & D. Kirsh (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-fifth annual conference of the cognitive science society (Vol. 25, pp. 258–263). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clement, J. (2008). Creative model construction in scientists and students: Role of imagery, analogy and mental simulation. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Clement, J. (2009). The role of imagistic simulation in scientific thought experiments. TOPICS in Cognitive Science, 1, 686–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, M. (2005). Wittgenstein’s beetle and other thought experiments. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • diSessa, A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 105–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, C. E. (1994). Thinking physics is gedanken physics. San Francisco: Insight Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galili, I. (1995). Mechanics background ınfluences students’ conceptions in electromagnetism. International Journal of Science Education, 17(3), 371–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research. Boston: Ally and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gendler, T. S. (1994). Tools of trade: Thought experiments examined. The Harvard Review of Philosophy, 4(1), 81–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gendler, T. S. (1998). Galileo and the indispensability of scientific thought experiments. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 49, 397–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gendler, T. S. (2000). Thought experiment: On the powers and limits of ımaginary cases. London, New York (NY): Garland Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gendler, T. S. (2004). Thought experiments rethought and repercieved. Philosophy of Science, 71, 1152–1163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K., & Reiner, M. (2000). Thought experiments in science education: Potential and current realization. International Journal of Science Education, 22(3), 265–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K., & Reiner, M. (2004). The symbiotic roles of empirical experimentation and thought experimentation in the learning of physics. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 1819–1834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegarty, M. (2004). Mechanical reasoning by mental simulation. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 8(6), 280–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30, 141–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, S. (2006). The science thought experiment: How might it be used profitably in the classroom? Interchange, 37(1), 77–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kühne, U. (1995). Thought experiments and the inference to a coherent explanation. In Volume of Abstract. 10th International congress of logic, methodology and philosophy of science. Florence, Italy.

  • Kujundzic, N. (1998). The role of variation in thought experiments. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 12(3), 239–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lattery, M. J. (2001). Thought experiments in physics education: A simple and practical example. Science & Education, 10, 485–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nersessian, N. J. (1993). In the theoretician’s laboratory: Thought experiments as mental modeling. In D. Hull, M. Forbes, & K. Okruhlik (Eds.), PSA: Proceedings of the 1992 Biennal meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 2 (pp. 291–301). East Lansing, MI: PSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nersessian, N. J. (2008). Mental modeling in conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of conceptual change (pp. 391–416). London: Rutledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton, J. D. (1991). Thought experiments in Einstein’s work. In T. Horowitz & G. Massey (Eds.), Thought experiments in science and philosophy (pp. 129–148). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton, J. D. (2004). On thought experiments: Is there more to the argument? Philosophy of Science, 71, 1139–1151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orgill, M., & Bodner, G. M. (2007). Locks and keys: An analysis of biochemistry students’ use of analogies. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 35, 244–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozdemir, O. F. (2009). Avoidance from thought experiments: Fear of misconception. International Journal of Science Education, 31(8), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiner, M. (1998). Thought experiments and collaborative learning in physics. International Journal of Science Education, 20(9), 1043–1059.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reiner, M. (2006). The context of thought experiments in physics learning. Interchange, 37(1–2), 97–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reiner, M., & Burko, L. (2003). On the limitations of thought experiments in physics and implications for physics learning. Science & Education, 12, 365–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reiner, M., & Gilbert, J. K. (2000). Epistemological resources for thought experimentation in science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 22(5), 486–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rescher, N. (2005). What if: Thought experimentation in philosophy. New Brunswick (NJ): Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Sorenson, R. (1992). Thought experiments. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, A. L., & Clement, J. (2006). Designing classroom thought experiments: What we can learn from imagery indicators and expert protocols. In Proceedings of the NARST 2006 annual meeting, San Francisco, CA.

  • Stephens, A. L., & Clement, J. (2012). Role of thought experiments in science and science learning. In K. Tobin, C. Mcrobbie, & B. Fraser (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education, 24 (pp. 157–175). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Velentzas, A., & Halkia, K. (2010). The use of thought and hands on experiments in teaching physics. In Proceedings of seventh ınternational conrefence hand-on science bridging the science and society gap, Rethymo,Greece.

  • Velentzas, A., & Halkia, K. (2011). The Heisenberg’s microscope as an example of using thought experiments in teaching physics theories to students of the upper secondary school. Research in Science Education, 41, 525–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velentzas, A., & Halkia, K. (2012). The use of thought experiments in teaching physics to upper secondary level students: Two examples from the theory of relativity. International Journal of Science Education, 1–24. doi:10.1080/09500693.2012.682182

  • Velentzas, A., Halkia, K., & Skorduolis, C. (2007). Thought experiments in the theory of relativity and in quantum mechanics: Their presence in textbooks and in popular science books. Science & Education, 16, 353–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the reviewers for Science & Education who helped clarify the arguments and Dr. Laura Colucci-Gray who significantly improved the presentation of the study by copyediting the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Elementary Education, Bulent Ecevit University, 67300, Zonguldak, Turkey

    Şule Dönertaş Kösem

  2. Department of Secondary Science and Mathematics Education, Middle East Technical University, 06531, Ankara, Turkey

    Ömer Faruk Özdemir

Authors
  1. Şule Dönertaş Kösem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ömer Faruk Özdemir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ömer Faruk Özdemir.

Appendix: Physics Problems Used During Interviews

Appendix: Physics Problems Used During Interviews

  1. (1)

    There is a water hose whose one end is folded into a shape like 6 and the other end is connected to the tap. When the tap turned on, which path will the water shooting out the folded end follow? (Epstein 1994) (Fig. 6)

    Fig. 6
    figure 6

    Illustration of Problem 1

    Full size image
  2. (2)

    A U-shaped magnet fixed in front of an iron car is illustrated in the Fig. 7. Will hanging another U shaped magnet facing it at opposite poles make the car move? Why? (Epstein 1994)

    Fig. 7
    figure 7

    Illustration of Problem 2

    Full size image
  3. (3)

    Suppose an open railroad car is moving on a straight road. It is raining heavily and an appreciable amount of rain falls into the car and accumulates there. Will the accumulated rain have an effect on the motion of the car? Will the rain have an effect on the motion of the car, if rain drops fall sideways (suppose making 45° angle with horizontal direction)? (Epstein 1994) (Fig. 8)

    Fig. 8
    figure 8

    Illustration of Problem 3

    Full size image
  4. (4)

    Emre and Ahmet are playing ball on a platform which rotates on its axis, as shown in the figure. Emre throws the ball towards Ahmet in a straight line. Which direction should Ahmet lean in order to catch the ball? (Epstein 1994) (Fig. 9)

    Fig. 9
    figure 9

    Illustration of Problem 4

    Full size image
  5. (5)

    As shown in the Fig. 10, there is a straight rod hanged from its center which holds two pans at each end. Two kilograms of mass were put on the right pan and three kilograms on the left. At that point, left pan is touching the table, right pan is hanging up in the air. If we take 1 kg from the left pan, what do you expect to observe?

    Fig. 10
    figure 10

    Illustration of Problem 5

    Full size image
  6. (6)

    Which path in the Fig. 11 would the ball most closely fallow after it exits the tube at ‘r’ and moves across the frictionless table top? (Hestenes et al. 1992)

    Fig. 11
    figure 11

    Illustration of Problem 6

    Full size image
  7. (7)

    There is a vehicle having a fan and sail system on it, as shown in the Fig. 12. The vehicle is staying at rest on a straight road. When the fan of the vehicle switched on, do we expect the vehicle to move? (Epstein 1994)

    Fig. 12
    figure 12

    Illustration of Problem 7

    Full size image
  8. (8)

    There is an open railroad car moving on a straight road as shown in the Fig. 13. The car is full of water and there is a cork at the bottom of the car. Will the motion of water have an affect on the motion of the car, when the cork is opened? (Epstein 1994)

    Fig. 13
    figure 13

    Illustration of Problem 8

    Full size image
  9. (9)

    There is a train wagon moving on an elliptically shaped railroad. Inside the wagon, there is a ball hold at the center of the floor. What can be observed about the motion of the ball when the ball is released? (Fig. 14)

    Fig. 14
    figure 14

    Illustration of Problem 9

    Full size image
  10. (10)

    As shown in the Fig. 15; Haluk and Ozge are sitting on the seats of a seesaw, in an equal distance from the center. Haluk and Ozge’s weights are equal. However, due to the bag on the back of Haluk, they are positioned as shown in the figure. What will be expected about the position of the seesaw if Haluk removes the bag from his back without changing his place on the seat?

    Fig. 15
    figure 15

    Illustration of Problem 10

    Full size image

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kösem, Ş.D., Özdemir, Ö.F. The Nature and Role of Thought Experiments in Solving Conceptual Physics Problems. Sci & Educ 23, 865–895 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9635-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9635-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation