本研究運用眼球追蹤法，探討具有先備知識的生命科學系大一學生之迷思概念與概念衝突。受測者分成實驗組與控制組，實驗材料為七題生物學「細胞分裂」單元常見的迷思概念題目。實驗組的受測者於測驗後給予正確答案閱讀，控制組則沒有給予答案。實驗組發現作答錯誤時，預計會產生認知衝突，為了減低認知衝突，受試者會對概念進行重新理解，藉此調節其後續閱讀相關文章的認知負荷。研究的最後階段則利用問卷調查兩個組別受測者在閱讀相關文章材料後的學習成效，是否會因為有無經歷答案的閱讀歷程而有不同。本研究利用眼球追蹤法，分析受試者閱讀題目與文章過程中的眼動模式分析是否與認知衝突相關。眼動指標包括瞳孔凝視面積變化率、總凝視時間、凝視時間對總凝視時間的百分比以及第一次閱讀凝視時間。
目前的研究結果指出，閱讀題目的瞳孔凝視面積變化率為受試者自我預估是否答題正確或錯誤的判斷力指標。而在控制組與實驗組兩組眼動指標的分析與學習成效之比較，發現實驗組在經歷認知衝突後，實驗組與控制組對於文章有相等的認知努力程度，而實驗組對於文章相關的概念閱讀有較好的理解，代表答案的閱讀歷程對於受測者是有所助益的。此外，針對認知衝突眼動模式分析結果，發現實驗組在閱讀答案的瞳孔凝視面積變化率與題目困難度有關連性。而實驗組的受測者認知衝突導致的概念改變的確會反映在後續文章的閱讀過程中，針對低難度的題目，作答錯誤的受測者會在閱讀答案的過程中調解此一衝突，並且在其後閱讀文章的過程中付出較低的認知努力程度。針對中難度與高難度的題目，閱讀錯誤答案過程的瞳孔凝視面積變化率較小，代表作答錯誤已經在自己的預期中，雖然沒有積極調解此一衝突，但已經引起注意力資源的重新分配，因此在後續文章閱讀的相關概念上給予較多的認知資源。

In this study, we used the eye tracking method to investigate university biology students’ misconceptions and cognitive conflict. participants were divided into the experimental and control groups. Students took the misconception test first, and then proceeded to read a short expositive text. Before reading the expositive text, students of experimental group were given the correct answer of each item, while the control group read the short article without an interruption. All participants filled the questionnaire after the experiment. Students’ eye movements are recorded all the time during the experiment. The eye movement measures analyzed in the study were the changes in pupil size, first pass fixation duration time, total fixation duration and percent time fixated related to total fixation duration.
The study showed that the change of pupil area could be the indicator of self-judgment ability over the test result. The comparative analysis between the control and the experimental groups showed that both groups afforded equal cognitive efforts to the expositive text but the experimental group demonstrated better concept achievement. The study result suggested that the offer of correct answers was useful for self-learning. The eye movement analysis found that the pupil area change rate of the experimental group was related to the level of item difficulty.For the easy items, participants of the experiment group who went through cognitive conflict (i.e. those who had wrong answers) showed larger pupil area change rate but spent less time in reading the expositive text. The finding suggested that for items of low difficulty, participants were able to mediate his/her cognitive conflict immediately and consequently paid less cognitive effort to the reading of the expositive text. On the contrary, for items of the medium and high level of difficulty, participants showed smaller pupil area change rate but longer reading time. This result implied that for difficult items, students did not mediate immediately his/her cognitive conflict. As a result, reading time increased. It should be noted that the increased reading time were relocated to areas related to their misconceptions.

Aston-Jones, G., & Cohen, J. D. (2005). An integrative theory of locus coeruleus-norepinephrine function: adaptive gain and optimal performance.Annu. Rev. Neurosci., 28, 403-450.
Beatty, J. (1982). Task-evoked pupillary responses, processing load, and the structure of processing resources. Psychological bulletin, 91(2), 276.
Brown, C. R. (1990). Some misconceptions in meiosis shown by students responding to an advanced level practical examination question in biology.Journal of Biological Education, 24(3), 182-186.
Cheng, C. H. & Yang, F. Y.(2016). Using the eye tracking method to reveal students’ cognitive conflicts. 2016 NARST, Baltimore, USA.
Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of educational research, 63(1), 1-49.
Demberg, V. (2013). Pupillometry: the index of cognitive activity in a dual-task study.
In Proceedings of the 35th annual meeting of the cognitive science society (cogsci-13). URL http://www. coli. uni-saarland. de/vera/ICApaper. pdf(Vol. 1).
Goldinger, S. D., & Papesh, M. H. (2012). Pupil dilation reflects the creation and retrieval of memories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(2), 90-95.
Hess, E. H., & Polt, J. M. (1964). Pupil size in relation to mental activity during simple problem-solving. Science, 143(3611), 1190-1192.
Iqbal, S. T., Zheng, X. S., & Bailey, B. P. (2004, April). Task-evoked pupillary response to mental workload in human-computer interaction. In CHI'04 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 1477-1480). ACM.
Jia, Q. (2010). A brief study on the implication of constructivism teaching theory on classroom teaching reform in basic education. International Education Studies, 3(2), 197.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: from eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological review, 87(4), 329.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery,
problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.
Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., O'Loughlin, M., Schauble, L., Leadbeater, B., & Yotive, W. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. Academic Press.
Lai, M. L., Tsai, M. J., Yang, F. Y., Hsu, C. Y., Liu, T. C., Lee, S. W. Y., ... & Tsai, C. C. (2013). A review of using eye-tracking technology in exploring learning from
2000 to 2012. Educational Research Review, 10, 90-115.
Lee, G., & Yi, J. (2013). Where cognitive conflict arises from?: The structure of creating cognitive conflict. International Journal of Science and Mathematics
Education, 11(3), 601-623.
Lewis, J., Leach, J., & Wood-Robinson, C. (2000). Chromosomes: the missing link—young people's understanding of mitosis, meiosis, and fertilisation. Journal of Biological Education, 34(4), 189-199.
Lord, T. R. (1997). A comparison between traditional and constructivist teaching in college biology. Innovative Higher Education, 21(3), 197-216.
McComas, W. F. (Ed.). (2013). The language of science education: An expanded glossary of key terms and concepts in science teaching and learning. Springer Science & Business Media.
Michael, J. (2006). Where's the evidence that active learning works?. Advances in physiology education, 30(4), 159-167.
Minassian, A., Granholm, E., Verney, S., & Perry, W. (2004). Pupillary dilation to simple vs. complex tasks and its relationship to thought disturbance in schizophrenia patients. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 52(1), 53-62.
O'Donnell, R. D., & Eggemeier, F. T. (1986). Workload assessment methodology.
O'loughlin, M. (1992). Rethinking science education: Beyond Piagetian constructivism toward a sociocultural model of teaching and learning. Journal of research in science teaching, 29(8), 791-820.
Paas, F., Van Gog, T., & Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory: New conceptualizations, specifications, and integrated research perspectives. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 115-121.
Payne, D. T., Parry, M. E., & Harasymiw, S. J. (1968). Percentage of pupillary dilation as a measure of item difficulty. Perception & Psychophysics, 4(3), 139-143.
Pearsall, N. R., Skipper, J. E. J., & Mintzes, J. J. (1997). Knowledge restructuring in the life sciences: A longitudinal study of conceptual change in biology. Science Education, 81(2), 193-215.
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children (Vol. 8, No. 5, pp. 18-1952). New York: International Universities Press.
Piquado, T., Isaacowitz, D., & Wingfield, A. (2010). Pupillometry as a measure of cognitive effort in younger and older adults. Psychophysiology, 47(3), 560-569.
Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science education, 66(2), 211-227.
Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. The quarterly journal of experimental psychology, 62(8), 1457-1506.
Riemeier, T., & Gropengießer, H. (2008). On the roots of difficulties in learning about cell division: process‐based analysis of students’ conceptual development in
teaching experiments. International Journal of Science Education, 30(7), 923-939.
Sigel, I. E. (1979). On becoming a thinker: A psychoeducational model.Educational psychologist, 14(1), 70-78.
Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational psychology review, 10(3), 251-296.
Thomas, A. (1988) An investigation into misconceptions about the meiotic process and related areas of genetics held by post A level university undergraduates. Unpublished BSc dissertation, University of Hull.
Thomas, B., & Watters, J. J. (2015). Perspectives on Australian, Indian and Malaysian
approaches to STEM education. International Journal of Educational Development, 45, 42-53.
Von Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Constructivism in education.
Wandersee, J. H., Mintzes, J. J., & Novak, J. D. (1994). Research on alternative conceptions in science. Handbook of research on science teaching and learning, 177, 210.
Wierda, S. M., van Rijn, H., Taatgen, N. A., & Martens, S. (2012). Pupil dilation deconvolution reveals the dynamics of attention at high temporal resolution.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(22), 8456-8460.
Yang, J., Wang, S., Chen, H. C., & Rayner, K. (2009). The time course of semantic and syntactic processing in Chinese sentence comprehension: Evidence from eye movements. Memory & cognition, 37(8), 1164-1176.
Yılmaz, Ö., Tekkaya, C., Geban, Ö., & Özden, Y. (1998). Lise-1. sınıf Öğrencilerinin Hücre Bölünmesi Ünitesindeki Kavram Yanılgılarının Tespiti. III. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri Eğitimi Sempozyumu, 23-25.