How people reason about disease transmission is central to their commonsense theories, scientific literacy, and adherence to public health guidelines. This study provided an in-depth assessment of U.S. children's (ages 5–12, N = 180) and their parents' (N = 125) understanding of viral transmission of COVID-19 and the common cold, during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary aim was to discover children's causal models of viral transmission, by asking them to predict and explain counter-intuitive outcomes (e.g., asymptomatic disease, symptom delay) and processes that cannot be directly observed (e.g., viral replication, how vaccines work). A secondary aim was to explore parental factors that might contribute to children's understanding. Although even the youngest children understood germs as disease-causing and were highly knowledgeable about certain behaviors that transmit or block viral disease (e.g., sneezing, mask-wearing), they generally failed to appreciate the processes that play out over time within the body. Overall, children appeared to rely on two competing mental models of viruses: one in which viruses operate strictly via mechanical processes (movement through space), and one in which viruses are small living creatures, able to grow in size and to move by themselves. These results suggest that distinct causal frameworks co-exist in children's understanding. A challenge for the future is how to teach children about illness as a biological process without also fostering inappropriate animism or anthropomorphism of viruses. © 2023 Elsevier B.V.

Existing research has consistently supported a relationship between creative achievement and specific personality traits (e.g. openness to experience). However, such work has largely focused on univariate associations, potentially obscuring complex interactions among multiple personality factors, rendering an incomplete picture of the creative personality. We applied a psychometric network approach to characterize the multidimensional personality structure of highly creative individuals in the arts (artists) and sciences (scientists), using data from three samples (N = 4,015): college students, a representative adult sample, and the Big-C project of eminent creative professionals. Replicating past work, we found that artists showed reliably higher levels of openness to experience compared to scientists and a control group of less creative people. Psychometric network analysis revealed that artists were characterized by higher connectivity (i.e. co-occurrence) with other personality traits for openness, indicating that openness may be more heterogeneous in how it co-occurs with other personality traits in highly creative people. Across all three samples, we found that the scientists' personality network structure was more cohesive than the personality network of artists and the control group, indicating greater homogeneity in the personality characteristics of scientists. Our findings uncover a constellation of traits that give rise to creative achievement in the arts and sciences.

Current threats to biodiversity are profound, yet relatively little is systematically known from controlled studies about the factors that promote conservation attitudes, moral concern, and environmentalist behavior in relation to endangered species that are unfamiliar or aversive. In two experiments, we drew on cognitive and develop-mental research to explore the causal influence of scientific naming, and conceptual information about anthropocentric or biocentric functional effects on US urban adults' (Study 1) and 9-to 11-year-old children's (Study 2) attitudes about conserving recently discovered insects. We also explored whether negative emotional reactions outweigh conceptual information about names and functions when predicting conservation concern. In Study 1, scientific labels largely had no effect on urban adults' baseline ambivalence about the importance of conserving unfamiliar arthropods. However, conservation concern was increased by hearing about the insects' functional behavior, particularly anthropocentric functions that benefit humans. Adults' feelings of disgust about the insects negatively predicted conservation attitudes; however, emotions never outweighed conceptual in-formation in predicting adults' attitudes or behavior. Study 2 found that, as with adults, scientific labeling in-formation either had no, or a negative, impact on urban fourth and fifth graders' baseline ambivalence to preserving unknown insects. However, both biocentric and anthropocentric functional information increased concern: Fourth graders were particularly moved by biocentric functions while fifth graders showed a greater anthropocentric bias. Children's emotional reactions were also predictive. Unlike with adults, children's feelings sometimes outweighed effects of conceptual information in predicting conservationist responses. Together, these findings illuminate developmental trajectories in conservation attitudes, especially biocentrism, in urban US children and adults. They also shed light on factors that can be manipulated (e.g., by communication specialists) to provoke conservation concern. Importantly, they clarify the role of words, functions, and feelings in shaping social and moral attitudes.

The feelings of difficulty and familiarity (FOD and FOF) are two types of metacognitive experiences. Both may influence student engagement and the application of metacognitive strategies, but these relationships are not well understood, in part because many studies have relied on self-report measures of behaviors that may not accurately reflect students' actual behaviors. In this study, FOD and FOF were related to objective measures of off-task behaviors and metacognitive strategies. These measures were extracted from 88 sixth graders' action logs within a computer-based learning environment known as Betty's Brain. Pre- and post-tests were administered to assess learning. Results reveal that high-FOD students showed more off-task behaviors and fewer strategic behaviors than low-FOD students, particularly when this difference was measured in terms of the frequency (as opposed to proportion) of strategic behaviors. FOF was not associated with off-task behaviors and metacognitive strategies but emerged as a moderator in the relationship between FOD and learning gains. Low-FOD students learned more than high-FOD students in the low-FOF group, but such a difference was not found in the high-FOF group.

It is widely recognized that debugging is challenging for novice programmers and, as such, computing educators and researchers have called for explicit debugging instruction. Debugging requires various knowledge and skills, and different students may show different strengths and weaknesses. An understanding of such individual differences is important as it may guide personalized instruction. The current study investigated individual differences in debugging in an undergraduate introductory computer science course. We extracted variables related to debugging from students' submission traces to programming problems in the first month of the course. We applied latent profile analysis to these variables and identified three distinctive profiles. Profile A showed higher debugging accuracy and speed. Profile B showed lower debugging performance in runtime and logic errors, while profile C had lower performance in syntactic errors and tended to make large code edit every submission. Students' gender and self-rated programming ability predicted profile membership. Moreover, profile A got higher scores than the others in the first exam, and this difference persisted in the second and third exam, even controlling for background variables and score on the first exam. We investigated how students transitioned across debugging profiles over the duration of the course. From the beginning to the end of the course, a large part of students stayed in lower performance profiles. Overall, these findings support the call that debugging should be taught at an early stage and suggest that different groups may need different debugging instructions or support.

There is a need for a more robust conceptualization of engagement in mathematics education research. Investigating how teachers describe engagement can provide insight into relationships between purposes of engagement and dimensions of engagement. In this exploratory study, we examined how 28 secondary mathematics teachers in two states in the USA talked about their students' engagement. During interviews, we asked teachers to provide their definitions for engagement, describe their teaching strategies for engaging students, and describe their observations of engagement during a video clip from their own classroom. We interpreted teachers' talk to identify how they described the nature of mathematics engagement (dimensions such as behavioral, cognitive, affective, and/or social engagement) and purposes of engagement (engagement in learning or in schooling [Harris, 2011]). When teachers described the purpose of engagement as engagement in learning, they also tended to describe the nature of engagement with cognitive and social dimensions and with multiple dimensions of engagement.

Students' interest pathways are fashioned not only from existing educational resources and opportunities, but importantly also by extending beyond them. In this study, we conceptualise these extensions as productive deviations and engage in a comparative analysis of various productive deviations we have identified in our ethnographic study of seven 5th and 6th grade FUSE Studios - an alternative learning infrastructure for schools. Our analysis shows that the deviations can vary from short term excursions to semester-long projects and can also become the focus of other students' interests.

Creativity often requires envisioning novel connections and combinations among elements in space, e.g., to invent a new product or generate a work of art. A relationship between spatial cognition and creativity has been demonstrated at both the behavioral and neural levels, but the exact neurocognitive mechanisms that bridge this connection remain unclear. The present study tested whether individual differences in functional activation in spatial cognition-implicated brain regions (specifically focusing on premotor and superior parietal cortex) during mental rotation were associated with figural creativity in a composite object creation task. Functional activation in premotor and superior parietal cortex during a classical spatial task (mental rotation; MRT) has previously been causally linked with dissociable components of spatial cognition: superior parietal activity with abstract spatial representation, and premotor activity with active spatial manipulation. The present findings indicate that individual differences in functional activation of both superior parietal cortex and premotor cortex during MRT were associated with individual differences in figural creativity. The present data thus provide new evidence of a correlation between the activity in spatial cognition-implicated brain regions and figural creativity, and suggest initial insights into particular components of spatial processing (both representation and manipulation) that may be related to creative ability.

Teachers' mathematical knowledge has important consequences for the quality of the learning environment they create for their students to learn mathematics. Yet relatively little is known about how teachers reason proportionally, despite the fact that proportional reasoning is foundational for several mathematics concepts and that ratios and proportional relationships constitute a major component of the middle school mathematics curriculum. In this study, we investigated how teachers reasoned proportionally on a nonroutine ratio task and the extent to which their proportional reasoning was able to predict their overall understanding of the relevant concepts: ratios and proportional relationships. Using data collected from 238 US mathematics teachers, we found that teachers' proportional reasoning could be grouped into four categories: incorrect, additive, relative, and proportional reasoning. Our results also indicated that teachers' overall knowledge of ratios and proportional relationships aligned with the way they reasoned proportionally, meaning that teachers who used incorrect reasoning on a separate task received the lowest scores on average on the ratios and proportional relationships measure, whereas those who reasoned proportionally had the highest mean scores on average. Implications of the study include the need to shift attention to the way teachers reason in relation to the two elements of proportional reasoning (covariance and invariance) to capture the nuances in their understanding of ratios and proportional relationships.

Adolescents' (n = 342, 169 boys) general algebra and algebra word problems performance were assessed in 9th grade as were intelligence, academic achievement, working memory, and spatial abilities in prior grades. The adolescents reported on their academic attitudes and anxiety and their teachers reported on their in-class attentive behavior in 7th to 9th grade. There were no sex differences on the general algebra measure or for mathematics achievement, but boys had an advantage on the algebra word problems measure (d = .51) and for spatial abilities (ds = .29 to .58). Boys had higher mathematics self-efficacy (d = .24 to .33), lower mathematics anxiety (ds = -.31 to -.53) and were less attentive in classrooms (ds = -.28 to -.37). A series of structural equation models revealed the sex difference for algebra word problems was mediated by spatial abilities and mathematics anxiety, controlling myriad confounds. Public Significance Statement Sex differences in mathematics are typically small but larger for word problems. The latter assess the ability to use mathematics in problem-solving situations and are often included on high-stakes tests. Boys' higher spatial abilities appeared to provide them with an advantage and girls' mathematics anxiety a disadvantage in solving algebra word problems.