Achievement in Chemistry Problem-Solving as a Function of the Mobility-Fixity Dimension

Abstract

The present studies explored the relation between students' achievement in chemistry problem-solving and the Mobility-Fixity dimension. Fixity characterizes consistency of function of field-independent subjects in a field-independent fashion, while Mobility provides for variation according to circumstances. The effect of this cognitive variable was examined as a function of the type and the complexity of the problem. Two kinds of problems were used, chemical equilibrium problems with varying mental demand and logical structure, and organic synthesis problems with varying mental demand. The subjects had to carry out different mental tasks, such as manipulation of logical schemata, applying algorithmic procedures, solving nonalgorithmic problems. In all cases, Mobile subjects demonstrated higher achievement than Fixed subjects. The results of this study support the hypothesis that the Mobility-Fixity dimension can serve as a predictor variable of students' performance on chemistry problem-solving.

Cognitive Variables in Problem Solving: A Nonlinear Approach

“…This reinforces previous research findings (Niaz, 1989b;Niaz & Saud De Nunez, 1991;Niaz, Saud De Nunez & Ruiz De Pineda, 2000;Stamovlasis et al, 2002). Problem solving in chemistry requires flexibility of functioning and potential for adapting to a wide spectrum of experiences, and this is facilitated by mobility.…”

“…An alternative mobility-fixity classification can be postulated on the basis of the data from the DBS test in place of the Figural Intersection Test (FIT). The two constructs must share a common space, as is evidenced also by the high correlation between DBS and FIT: r = 0.66 (Stamovlasis et al, 2002). This explains the success of working-memory capacity as an alternative measure for defining the mobility-fixity dimension.…”

“…The characteristic of FI subjects to function consistently in a FI fashion (i.e., fixity) and of others to vary more according to circumstances (i.e., mobility) has been referred to as the 'mobilityfixity dimension' by Witkin (1965) and as a 'Mobile/fixed cognitive style' by Pascual-Leone (1989). The classification (Niaz, 1989b;Niaz & Saud De Nunez, 1991;Niaz, Saud De Nunez & Ruiz De Pineda, 2000;Stamovlasis, Kousathana, Angelopoulos, Tsaparlis & Niaz, 2002) involves the Figural Intersection Test, FIT (Pascual-Leone & Burtis, 1974) and the test for field dependence/independence.…”

“…The procedure for classifying subjects as mobile or fixed was the same as that used in previous studies by Niaz (Niaz, 1989b;Niaz & Saud De Nunez, 1991;Niaz et al, 2000;Stamovlasis et al, 2002). An alternative mobility-fixity classification can be postulated on the basis of the data from the DBS test in place of the Figural Intersection Test (FIT).…”

Following the Wrong Footsteps: Fixation Effects of Pictorial Examples in a Design Problem-Solving Task.

“…It is important to note that our findings do indicate that fixation can be eliminated with the appropriate defixation instructions. A further exploration of the phenomenon of fixation is of great significance not only for cognitive psychology but also for various domains related to technological and scientific education (e.g., Doornekamp, 2001;Heiner, 2002;Stamovlasis, Kousathana, & Angelopoulos, 2002;Won, 2001). In those fields (e.g., physics, chemistry, engineering), learning often occurs through the use of examples in pictorial format.…”