ReviewCognitive research: principles and implications2017
Grounded understanding of abstract concepts: The case of STEM learning.
Review in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of Artificial Intelligence-Supported Instruction on Student Learning in STEM: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Review
- Producing concept-motivated signs supports learning of STEM in American Sign Language.NPJ science of learning · 2026Article
- Feel it to learn it!-Cognitive and motivational effects of haptic learning materials.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Improving pre-service teachers' AI competencies: a quasi experimental study.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- How do students reason about statistical sampling with computer simulations? An integrative review from a grounded cognition perspective.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024Review
- Ultimate Grounding of Abstract Concepts: A Graded Account.Journal of cognition · 2022Article
- Simulating a Computational Biological Model, Rather Than Reading, Elicits Changes in Brain Activity during Biological Reasoning.CBE life sciences education · 2020Article
- A revolution in biochemistry and molecular biology education informed by basic research to meet the demands of 21st century career paths.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2020Article
- A Peircean account of concepts: grounding abstraction in phylogeny through a comparative neuroscientific perspective.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2018Review
- Article
- Embodied cognition and STEM learning: overview of a topical collection in CR:PI.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Characterizing the neural implementation of abstract conceptual representations has long been a contentious topic in cognitive science. At the heart of the debate is whether the "sensorimotor" machinery of the brain plays a central role in representing concepts, or whether the involvement of these perceptual and motor regions is merely peripheral or epiphenomenal. The domain of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) learning provides an important proving ground for sensorimotor (or grounded) theories of cognition, as concepts in science and engineering courses are often taught through laboratory-based and other hands-on methodologies. In this review of the literature, we examine evidence suggesting that sensorimotor processes strengthen learning associated with the abstract concepts central to STEM pedagogy. After considering how contemporary theories have defined abstraction in the context of semantic knowledge, we propose our own explanation for how body-centered information, as computed in sensorimotor brain regions and visuomotor association cortex, can form a useful foundation upon which to build an understanding of abstract scientific concepts, such as mechanical force. Drawing from theories in cognitive neuroscience, we then explore models elucidating the neural mechanisms involved in grounding intangible concepts, including Hebbian learning, predictive coding, and neuronal recycling. Empirical data on STEM learning through hands-on instruction are considered in light of these neural models. We conclude the review by proposing three distinct ways in which the field of cognitive neuroscience can contribute to STEM learning by bolstering our understanding of how the brain instantiates abstract concepts in an embodied fashion.
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.