Kuhn D
Psychol Rev. 1989 Oct;96(4):674-89. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.96.4.674.
The metaphor of children and lay adults as intuitive scientists has gained wide acceptance. Although useful in one sense, pertaining to scientific understanding, in another, pertaining to the process of scientific thinking, the metaphor may be fundamentally misleading. Research is reviewed indicating that processes of scientific thinking differ significantly in children, lay adults, and scientists. Hence, it is the instruments of scientific thinking, not just the products, that undergo "strong restructuring" (Carey, 1986). A framework for conceptualizing development of scientific thinking processes is proposed, centering on progressive differentiation and coordination of theory and evidence. This development is metacognitive, as well as strategic. It requires thinking about theories, rather than merely with them, and thinking about evidence, rather than merely being influenced by it, and, hence, reflects the attainment of control over the interaction of theories and evidence in one's own thinking.
将儿童和非专业成年人比作直觉科学家的隐喻已被广泛接受。尽管从某种意义上说它是有用的，涉及科学理解，但从另一种意义上说，涉及科学思维过程时，这个隐喻可能从根本上具有误导性。本文回顾了相关研究，这些研究表明儿童、非专业成年人和科学家的科学思维过程存在显著差异。因此，经历“重大重构”的是科学思维的工具，而不仅仅是其产物（凯里，1986）。本文提出了一个概念框架，用于将科学思维过程的发展概念化，其核心是理论与证据的逐步分化和协调。这种发展既是元认知的，也是策略性的。它需要思考理论，而不仅仅是运用理论，需要思考证据，而不仅仅是受其影响，因此，它反映了在个人思维中对理论与证据相互作用的掌控能力的获得。
