ArticleCBE life sciences education2013
Student learning about biomolecular self-assembly using two different external representations.
Article in CBE life sciences education, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- A tangible and interactive viral model for enhancing virology education: using hepatitis B virus as a model system.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- A 3D-printed Sanger sequencing activity addresses student misconceptions.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2025Article
- 3D-Printed Self-Assembling Helical Models for Exploring Viral Capsid Structures.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Tangible symmetry elements and space-group models to guide from molecular to solid-state composition.Journal of applied crystallography · 2022Article
- Authenticity, Interactivity, and Collaboration in VR Learning Games.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2018Article
- 3D Printing of Molecular Models.The Journal of biocommunication · 2016Article
- Crystallographic education in the 21st century.Journal of applied crystallography · 2015Article
- Mixed-Methods Design in Biology Education Research: Approach and Uses.CBE life sciences educationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Self-assembly is the fundamental but counterintuitive principle that explains how ordered biomolecular complexes form spontaneously in the cell. This study investigated the impact of using two external representations of virus self-assembly, an interactive tangible three-dimensional model and a static two-dimensional image, on student learning about the process of self-assembly in a group exercise. A conceptual analysis of self-assembly into a set of facets was performed to support study design and analysis. Written responses were collected in a pretest/posttest experimental design with 32 Swedish university students. A quantitative analysis of close-ended items indicated that the students improved their scores between pretest and posttest, with no significant difference between the conditions (tangible model/image). A qualitative analysis of an open-ended item indicated students were unfamiliar with self-assembly prior to the study. Students in the tangible model condition used the facets of self-assembly in their open-ended posttest responses more frequently than students in the image condition. In particular, it appears that the dynamic properties of the tangible model may support student understanding of self-assembly in terms of the random and reversible nature of molecular interactions. A tentative difference was observed in response complexity, with more multifaceted responses in the tangible model condition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.