Sánchez MMP, de la Garza GA, López REO

Language: Spanish
References: 13
Page: 60-71
PDF size: 669.53 Kb.

ABSTRACT

The aim of the study was to make an example of the use of natural semantic networks as a way to compare the relative value of semantic organization indicators (M values) in two groups. This with the purpose to observe conceptual organization similarities among seven target concepts: environment, pollution, nature, city, ecology, deforestation, recycling. Two groups of students comprised by 57 biologists and 64 psychologists were selected for the study. Results suggest that similarity exists between all generated networks for the seven concepts in both groups, as demonstrated by a positive correlation. However, there are critical differences between the two conceptual organizations. For biology students the concepts of ecology and environment generated more academic type indicators, while psychologists generated environmental indicators of more common use. It is suggested that both groups have sufficient environmental information but with different meanings.

REFERENCES

1. Aitkenhead, A. & Slack, J. (1985). Issues in cognitive modeling. Londres, GB: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

2. Correa, N. & Rodrigo, M. (2001). La representación del comportamiento proambiental a partir de un contexto de activación de creencias única vs múltiple. Medio Ambiente y Comportamiento Humano, 2(1), 59–78.

3. De la Garza, G. A., Sánchez, M.M., & López, R. E (en prensa). El valor M un caso de distancia semántica o de cercanía semántica o de todo lo contrario. El enfoque cognitivo de la formación de significados.

4. Edel, R. & Ramírez, M. (2006). Construyendo el significado del cuidado ambiental: un estudio de caso en educación secundaria. Revista Electrónica Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en la Educación (REICE), 4(1), 52–70.

5. Figueroa, J. A., González, E. G., & Solís, V. M. (1981). Una aproximación al problema del significado. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 13(3), 447-458.

6. Greenwald, A., Banaji, M., Rudman, L., Franham, S., Nosek, B., & Mellott, D. (2002). A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review, 109(1), 3-25.

7. López, E. (2002). El enfoque cognitivo de la memoria humana. Técnicas de investigación. México, D.F.: Editorial Trillas.

8. Moreno, A. (1999) El Significado psicológico de conceptos relativos a la educación ambiental. Revista Interamericana de Educación de Adultos, 1(1-3), 92-109. Recuperado el 20 de agosto de 2007, de http://www.crefal.edu.mx/bibliotecadigital/CEDEAL/acervo_digital/coleccion_crefal/rieda/a1999_123/signific.pdf

9. Murphy, G. ( 2002). The big book of concepts. Massachusetts, EUA: The MIT Press.

10. Rumelhart, D. E. & Ortony, A. (1977). The representation of knowledge in memory. En A.C. Anderson, R.J. Spiro, & W.E. Montague. (Eds.), Schooling and the adquisition of knowledge (pp. 99-135). Hillslade, NJ, EUA: Erlbaum.

11. Rumelhart, D. E., Smolensky, P., McClelland, J. L., & Hinton, G. E. (1986). Schemata and sequential thought processes. En McClelland, J. L., Rumelhart, D. E. & the PDP research group, Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. (Vol. 2): Psychological and biological models. Massachusetts, EUA: MIT Press.

12. Souza, E. (2001). Representaciones de la naturaleza en dos ciudades brasileñas. Construyendo una base empírica para la educación ambiental. Medio Ambiente y Comportamiento Humano, 2(2), 57- 76.

13. Valverde, T., Cano-Sanatana, Z., Meave, J., & Carabia, J. (2005). Ecología y medio ambiente. México, D.F.: Prentice Hall.