Interference Thinking Students’ to Solve Proportion Problems Based on Cognitive Style
Keywords:
interference, cognitive style, proportionAbstract
Thinking interference is defined as a disruption in information processing caused by overlap between old and new knowledge, which can hinder students' problem solving. The purpose of this study is to describe the forms of interference junior high school students thinking in solving ratio problems, as viewed from the cognitive styles of Field Independent (FI) and Field Dependent (FD). This study employs a descriptive qualitative approach, with the research subjects being three seventh-grade junior high school students who are suspected of thinking interference. Research data were collected through the Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT), a ratio quiz, and interviews. The data analysis techniques used in this study were data reduction, data display, and conclusion. The results showed that FI students experienced retroactive interference characterized by students using the reverse proportion procedure to solve equivalent proportion problems. FD students experienced retroactive interference characterized by students solving problems using the reverse proportion procedure in equivalent proportion problems, and FD students experienced proactive interference characterized by students solving problems using the equivalent proportion procedure in reverse proportion problems. This occurs due to the similarity in solution procedures between equivalent proportion and reverse proportion. This study shows that both cognitive styles contribute to the emergence of thinking errors in solving comparison problems when students do not re-evaluate the appropriateness of the procedure to the problem context.References
Arican, M. (2024). Correction to: Preservice Middle and High School Mathematics Teachers’ Strategies when Solving Proportion Problems. In International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education (Vol. 22, Issue 4, p. 937). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-09943-2
Arican, M., & Kiymaz, Y. (2022). Investigating Preservice Mathematics Teachers’ Definitions, Formulas, and Graphs of Directly and Inversely Proportional Relationships. Mathematics Enthusiast, 19(2), 632–656. https://doi.org/10.54870/1551-3440.1566
Arifin, S., & Rahman, A. (2015). Profil Pemecahan Masalah Matematika Siswa Ditinjau dari Gaya Kognitif Dan Efikasi Diri Pada Siswa Kelas VIII Unggulan SMPN 1 Watampone. Jurnal Daya Matematis, (Vol. 3).
Cai, J., Middleton, J. A., Peterrliljedahl, P., & Editors, B. (n.d.). Problem Solving in Mathematics Instruction and Teacher Professional Development. http://www.springer.com/series/13030
Stenberg & Stenberg. (2016). Cognitive_Psychology.
National Council of Teacher Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Excecutive Summary Principle and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston: NCTM.
Fathiyah, I., Suryadi, D., & Prabawanto, S. (2024). Middle School Students’ Proportional Reasoning Ability in Solving Proportional and Non-proportional Problem. PRISMA, 13(1), 156. https://doi.org/10.35194/jp.v13i1.3841
García, T., Boom, J., Kroesbergen, E. H., Núñez, J. C., & Rodríguez, C. (2019). Planning, execution, and revision in mathematics problem solving: Does the order of the phases matter? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 61, 83–93. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.03.001
Herlina, S., Wahyuni, R., Julianti, D., & Novianti, A. (2024). Bransford & Stein Theory: Mathematical thinking Process of Prospective Mathematics Teacher Students in Solving Statistical Problems Based on Cognitive Learning Style. PRISMA, 13(2), 245. https://doi.org/10.35194/jp.v13i2.4844
Hidayanto, E., & Budiono, E. (2019). Students’ Thinking Interference in Understanding Functions. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1227(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1227/1/012015
Hu, Y., & Chen, Z. (2022). Learning Human Cognitive Appraisal Through Reinforcement Memory Unit. http://arxiv.org/abs/2208.03473
Lestari, A. P., Hidayanto, E., & Sukoriyanto, S. (2021). Proactive interference of seventh grade students in solving problems of the greatest common divisor. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2330. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0043382
Malik, F. A., Purwanto, P., & Subanji, S. (2025). Interferensi Proaktif Dan Retroaktif Dalam Menyelesaikan Masalah Perbandingan Senilai Dan Berbalik Nilai. AKSIOMA: Jurnal Program Studi Pendidikan Matematika, 14(2), 626. https://doi.org/10.24127/ajpm.v14i2.6377
Nurmutia, H. E. (2019). Pengaruh Gaya Kognitif Terhadap Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematis Siswa. EDUMATIKA: Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.32939/ejrpm.v2i1.443
Orban, S. A., Festini, S. B., Yuen, E. K., & Friedman, L. M. (2022). Verbal Memory Interference in Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Meta-Analytic Review. Journal of Attention Disorders, 26(12), 1549–1562. https://doi.org/10.1177/10870547221085515
Panjaitan, B. (2013). Proses Kognitif Siswa Dalam Pemecahan Masalah Matematika.
Pelen, M. S., & Artut, P. D. (2016). Seventh grade students’ problem solving success rates on proportional reasoning problems. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 2(1), 30–34. www.ijres.net
Takdirmin, & Mahmud, R. S. (2023). Menguak Tantangan Matematika: Memahami Kesalahan Siswa Dari Perspektif Gaya Kognitif Field Dependent Dan Field Independent. In ELIPS: JURNAL PENDIDIKAN MATEMATIKA (Vol. 4, Issue 1). http://journal.unpacti.ac.id/index.php/ELIPS
Sianturi, M., Suliantin, R., & Fitrianti, H. (2022). Relationships Between Cognitive Styles and Indigenous Students’ Mathematics Academic Outcomes. Journal of Learning for Development, 9(3), 528–544. https://doi.org/10.56059/jl4d.v9i3.684
Subanji. (2015). Teori Kesalahan Konstruksi Konsep dan Pemecahan Masalah (T. Nusantara, Ed.). Universitas Negeri Malang.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 PRISMA
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
