0
Views
1
Downloads
Open Access
Assessing Scientific Thinking in Early Childhood: Cross-Sectional Evidence for a Six-Dimensional Hierarchical Structure in Indonesian Preschoolers
Main Article Content
Abstract
Purpose – Scientific thinking in early childhood remains understudied in non-Western contexts, with many existing models derived from Western samples and limited to two or three dimensions. This study examines a six-dimensional hierarchical framework proposing that domain-general cognitive capacities (Attention & Focus, Working Memory, Problem Solving) support domain-specific scientific competencies (Observation Skills, Prediction & Reasoning, Experimentation) in Indonesian preschoolers aged 4–6 years. Age-related patterns, gender differences, and institutional-type differences are also investigated.
Design/methods/approach – Using a quantitative cross-sectional design, data were collected from 105 children (4–6 years) enrolled in secular and Islamic early childhood education institutions in South Sulawesi, Indonesia. Scientific thinking was assessed using the Scientific Thinking Assessment for Early Childhood (STAEC), a 25-item teacher-rated instrument developed through expert review and pilot testing with 30 teachers. Analyses included descriptive statistics, reliability analysis, Pearson correlations, ANOVAs, and t-tests to evaluate interdimensional relationships and group differences.
Findings – Results provided initial cross-sectional evidence consistent with a six-dimensional hierarchical organization of early scientific thinking. Domain-general capacities were strongly intercorrelated (r = .796–.831) and showed higher mean scores than domain-specific competencies, suggesting a foundational role. Working memory displayed the strongest associations with advanced competencies, particularly prediction & reasoning and experimentation. A significant age-related difference emerged only for observation skills, whereas other dimensions showed non-significant developmental trends. No gender differences were observed across any dimension, and no differences emerged across secular and Islamic institution types.
Research implications/limitations – The cross-sectional design limits developmental and causal inferences. Teacher ratings may introduce rater bias and do not capture moment-to-moment reasoning processes. The single-region sample constrains generalizability; future research should use longitudinal, larger, multi-region, and multi-method designs.
Practical implications – Early childhood programs should strengthen foundational cognitive capacities while providing explicit, developmentally appropriate support for prediction and experimentation, and maintain equal learning expectations across genders and educational settings.
Originality/value – This study offers initial empirical support for a multidimensional hierarchical model of early scientific thinking in a non-Western context, including secular and Islamic early childhood education settings.
Paper type Research paper
Keywords:
Article Details
How to Cite
Copyright
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process. It can lead to productive exchanges and earlier and greater citation of published work.
How to Cite
References
Ainnin, I., & Ismail. (2024). Integration of Islamic education into early childhood curriculum: Building character in the digital era. Absorbent Mind: Journal of Early Childhood Education, 4(2), 267–283. https://doi.org/10.37680/absorbent_mind.v4i2.6093
Best, J. R., & Miller, P. H. (2010). A developmental perspective on executive function. Child Development, 81(6), 1641–1660. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01499.x
Blair, C., & Razza, R. P. (2007). Relating effortful control, executive function, and false belief understanding to emerging math and literacy ability in kindergarten. Child Development, 78(2), 647–663. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01019.x
Brenneman, K. (2011). Assessment for preschool science learning and learning environments. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 13(1), 1–9.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cowan, N. (2014). Working memory underpins cognitive development, learning, and education. Educational Psychology Review, 26(2), 197–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9246-y
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Delserieys, A., & Kampeza, M. (2025). Current research and learning in the field of early childhood science education. Education Sciences, 15(9), Article 1194. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15091194
DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2021). Scale development: Theory and applications (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135–168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750
Enders, C. K. (2022). Applied missing data analysis (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
French, L. (2004). Science as the center of a coherent, integrated early childhood curriculum. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19(1), 138–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2004.01.004
García-Rodeja, I. (2024). Inquiry-based activities with woodlice in early childhood: Implementation and observations. Education Sciences, 14(7), Article 710. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14070710
Garon, N., Bryson, S. E., & Smith, I. M. (2008). Executive function in preschoolers: A review using an integrative framework. Psychological Bulletin, 134(1), 31–60. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.1.31
Goddu, M. K., & Gopnik, A. (2024). The development of human causal learning and reasoning. Nature Reviews Psychology, 3, 319–339. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-024-00300-5
Gomez, M. J. (2025). The impact of inquiry-based learning in science education: A systematic review of student engagement and achievement. Journal of Education, Learning, and Management, 2(2), 353–363. https://doi.org/10.69739/jelm.v2i2.1143
Gopnik, A. (2012). Scientific thinking in young children: Theoretical advances, empirical research, and policy implications. Science, 337(6102), 1623–1627. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1223416
Guarrella, C., van Driel, J., & Cohrssen, C. (2023). Toward assessment for playful learning in early childhood: Influences on teachers’ science assessment practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 60(3), 675–707. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21811
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2015). Managerial cognitive capabilities and the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 36(6), 831–850. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2247
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X
Hinkin, T. R. (2023). A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations. Journal of Management, 21(5), 967–988. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639502100509
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), Article 8. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. SAGE Publications.
Hsin, C.-T., Wu, H.-K., Luu, D. T., & Wei, M.-E. (2025). Fostering young children’s scientific practices in urban and Indigenous areas: An investigation of instructional strategies. International Journal of Science Education, 47(4), 582–606. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2343437
Hyde, J. S. (2014). Gender similarities and differences. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 373–398. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115057
Kim, H. Y. (2013). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: Assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics, 38(1), 52–54. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2013.38.1.52
Klahr, D., & Dunbar, K. (1988). Dual space search during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 12(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1201_1
Kline, R. B. (2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (5th ed.). Guilford Press.
Kuhn, D. (2010). What is scientific thinking and how does it develop? In U. Goswami (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development (2nd ed., pp. 497–523). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444325485.ch19
Miller, D. I., Nolla, K. M., Eagly, A. H., & Uttal, D. H. (2020). The development of children’s gender-science stereotypes: A meta-analysis of 5 decades of U.S. draw-a-scientist studies. Child Development, 91(2), 368–398. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13039
Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (2012). The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions: Four general conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(1), 8–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411429458
Nayfeld, I., Brenneman, K., & Gelman, R. (2011). Science in the classroom: Finding a balance between autonomous exploration and teacher-led instruction in preschool settings. Early Education and Development, 22(6), 970–988. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2010.507496
Nielsen, M., Haun, D., Kärtner, J., & Legare, C. H. (2017). The persistent sampling bias in developmental psychology: A call to action. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 162, 31–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.04.017
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Öztürk, E. (2025). Assessing scientific thinking in early childhood: Development and validation of the Scientific Thinking Skills Assessment Tool (STS-AT). The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences, 45, 88–97. https://doi.org/10.55549/epess.949
Reith, M. (2024). Fostering scientific reasoning competencies: Experimental investigation of instructional sequences impacting skills development. International Journal of Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2394708
Samarapungavan, A., Patrick, H., & Mantzicopoulos, P. (2011). What kindergarten students learn in inquiry-based science classrooms. Cognition and Instruction, 29(4), 416–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2011.608027
Schäfer, J., Reuter, T., Leuchter, M., & Karbach, J. (2024). Executive functions and problem-solving: The contribution of inhibition, working memory and cognitive flexibility to science problem-solving performance in elementary school students. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 244, Article 105962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2024.105962
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization (Rev. ed.). Doubleday.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640
Tzuriel, D., Weiss, T., & Kashy-Rosenbaum, G. (2024). The effects of working memory training on working memory, self-regulation, and analogical reasoning of preschool children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 695–714. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12709
Van der Graaf, J., Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2020). Scientific reasoning in kindergartners: Bridging the gap between skills and knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 69, Article 101367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101367
Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. L. (2017). Gender gap in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM): Current knowledge, implications for practice, policy, and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 29(1), 119–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9355-x
Weijters, B., & Baumgartner, H. (2012). Misresponse to reversed and negated items in surveys: A review. Journal of Marketing Research, 49(5), 737–747. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.11.0368
Xu, L. (2025). A conceptual framework for fostering gender equity in early years STEM education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-025-10553-y
Yangüez, M. (2025). Development and differentiation of executive function: Inhibition, working memory, and cognitive flexibility across early childhood. Journal of Cognitive Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2025.2547621
Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27(2), 172–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2006.12.001
Zuo, H., & Tang, S. (2024). Gender differences in early childhood STEM learning: A meta-analysis. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 66, 182–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2023.10.004