___

• Bao, L., Hogg, K., & Zollman, D. (2002). Model analysis of fine structures of student models: An example with Newton’s third law. American Journal of Physics, 70(7), 766-778.
• Brown, D.E. (1992). Using examples and analogies to remediate misconceptions in physics: Factors influencing conceptual change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 17-34.
• Brown, D.E. & Clement, J. (1989). Overcoming misconceptions via analogical reasoning: Abstract transfer versus explanatory model construction. Instructional Science, 18, 237-261.
• Bryce, T. & MacMillan, K. (2005). Encouraging conceptual change: The use of bridging analogies in the teaching of action reaction forces and the ‘at rest’ condition in physics. International Journal of Science Education, 27(6), 737-763.
• Camp, C.W. & Clement, J. (1994). Preconceptions in mechanics: Lessons dealing with students’ conceptual difficulties. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Iowa, USA.
• Champagne, A.B., Anderson, J.H., & Klopfer, L.E. (1980). Factors affecting the learning of classical mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 48(12), 1074-1079.
• Clement, J. (1987). Generation of spontaneous analogies by students solving science problems. In D. Topping, D. Crowell, & V.Kobayashi (Eds.)(1989). Thinking across cultures. The third international conference. Hillsdale, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
• Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students’ preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 1241-1257.
• Clement, J., Brown, D.E., & Zietsman, A. (1989). Not all preconceptions are misconceptions: Finding ‘anchoring conceptions’ for grounding instruction on students’ intuitions. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 554 565.
• Dagher, Z.R. (1995a). Review of studies on the effectiveness of instructional analogies in science education. Science Education, 79(3), 295-312.
• Dagher, Z.R. (1995b). Analysis of analogies used by science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(3), 259 270.
• Duit, R. (1991). On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. Science Education, 75(6), 649-672.
• Fraenkel, J.R. & Wallen N.E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education, (6th ed.). McGraw-Hill, USA.
• Gabel, D.L. & Sherwood, R. (1980). Effect of using analogies on chemistry achievement according to Piagetian levels. Science Education, 64, 709-716.
• Gick, M.L. & Holyoak, K.J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 1-38.
• Glynn, S.M., (1991). Explaining science concepts: A teaching-with-analogies model. In S. M. Glynn, R. H. Yeany, & B. K. Britton (eds.). The psychology of learning science (219-240). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrance Erlbaum.
• Griffith, W.T. (1985). Factors affecting performance in introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 53(9), 839-842.
• Halloun, I.A. & Hestenes, D. (1985). The initial knowledge state of college physics students. American Journal of Physics, 53(11), 1043-1048.
• Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30, 141-158.
• Heywood, D. (2002). The place of analogies in science education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), 233-247.
• Kilbourn, B. (2002). Analogies. In J. Wallace and W. Louden (Eds.) Dilemmas of Science Teaching. Perspectives on Problems of Practice (163-166). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
• Kolodner, J.L. (1997). Educational implications of analogy: A view from Case -Based Reasoning. American Psychologist, 52, 35-44.
• Mason, L. (1994). Cognitive and metacognitive aspects in conceptual change by analogy. Instructional Science, 22, 157-187.
• Maloney, D.P. (1984). Rule-governed approaches to physics- Newton’s third law. Physics Education, 19, 37-42.
• Reif, F. (1981). Teaching problem solving: A scientific approach. The Physics Teacher, 19, 310-316.
• Savinainen, A., Scott, P., & Viiri, J. (2005). Using a bridging representation and social interactions to foster conceptual change: Designing and evaluating instructional sequence for Newton's third law, Science Education, 89(2), 175-195.
• Smith, J.P., diSessa, A.A., & Roschelle, J. (1994). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115-163.
• Spiro, R.J., Feltovich, P.J., Coulson, R.L., & Anderson, D.K. (1989). Multiple analogies for complex concepts: Antidotes for analogy-induced misconception in advanced knowledge acquisition. In Vosniadou, S. and Ortony, A., (eds.), Similarity and Analogical Reasoning, 498-531. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Suzuki, H. (1994). The centrality of analogy in knowledge acquisition in instructional contexts. Human Development, 37, 207-219.
• Venville, G. & Bryer, L. (2002). Analogies. In J. Wallace, & W. Louden (Eds.) Dilemmas of Science Teaching. Perspectives on Problems of Practice (162-163). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
• Wong, E.D. (1993). Self-generated analogies as a tool for constructing and evaluating phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 367-380.
• Yılmaz, S. (2007). Finding anchoring analogies to help students’ misconceptions in physics. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
• Yılmaz, S., Eryılmaz, A., & Geban, Ö. (2006). Assessing the impact of bridging analogies in mechanics. School Science and Mathematics, 106(6), 220-230.
• Zeitoun, H.H. (1984). Teaching scientific analogies: A proposed model. Research in Science and Technological Education, 2, 107-125.
• Zietsman, A. & Clement, J. (1997). The role of extreme case reasoning in instruction for conceptual change. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(1), 61-89.