References
- Choi, H. (2016). Influences of gender, academic track and science achievement on high-school students’ views about physics. New Physics: Sae Mulli, 66(6), 696-704. https://doi.org/10.3938/NPSM.66.696
- Chambers, D. W. (1983). Stereotypic images of the scientist: The draw-a scientist test. Science Education, 67(2), 255-265. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730670213
- Ding, Z., & Ng, F. (2008). A new way of developing semantic differential scales with personal construct theory. Construction Management and Economics, 26, 1213-1226. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190802527522
- Finson, K. D. (2003). Applicability of the DAST-C to the images of scientists drawn by students of different racial groups. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 15(1), 15-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03174741
- Fralick, B., Kearn, J., Thompson, S. & Lyons, J. (2009). How middle schoolers draw engineers and scientists. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 60-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9133-3
- Hazari, Z., Cass, C., & Beattie, C. (2015). Obscuring power structures in the physics classroom: Linking teacher positioning, student engagement, and physics identity development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(6), 735-762. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21214
- Huang, Y., & Li, J. (2015). Comparing personal characteristic factors of imagination between expert and novice designers within different product design stages. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25(2), 261-292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-014-9276-x
- Ju, E., Lee, S., Kim, J., & Lee, J. (2009). Analysis of images of scientists learning drawn by third grade students. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 28(1), 35-45.
- Kang, H., & Kim, M. (2008). Investigating elementary school teachers’ self-images of science teaching. Korean Association for Science Education, 28(5), 464-470.
- Kang, H., & Lee, J. (2010). Elementary school students’ images of science class and factors influencing their formations. Korean Association for Science Education, 30(4), 519-531.
- Kim, D. (1991). Modern marketing principles. Seoul: Pakyoungsa Publication Co.
- Kim, S. (2005). Special education thesis writing. Seoul: Sigmapress Publication Co.
- Kim, Y., & Choi, M. (2001). The parent image of children and adolescents by semantic differential technique. Korean Journal of Play Therapy, 11(4), 3-14.
- Kim, I., & Chung, Y. (2009a). A study on the image of accounting subjects in business information high school students. Business Education Research, 23(1), 1-28.
- Kim, I., & Chung, Y. (2009b). A study on the accounting principles subject image of high school students semantic differential technique -On the basis of business information high school-. Business Education Research, 23(4), 1-17.
- Kim, K., & Ham, H. (2016). The attitudes and images of middle school students toward invention. Korean Association for Science Education, 36(1), 63-73. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.1.0063
- Kim, H., & Lee, B. (2003). Why do secondary students perceive physics is uninteresting and difficult? Sae Mulli, 52(6), 521-529.
- Kim, H., Park, S., & Kim, Y. (2012). A comparative study of middle school students’ images and perceptions of scientist, technician and engineer. Korean Association for Science Education, 32(1), 64-81. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.1.064
- Kurt, H. (2013). Determining biology teacher candidates’ conceptual structures about energy and attitudes towards energy. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 12(4), 399-423.
- Lee, J., Kim, H., Ju, E., & Lee, S. (2009). The relationship between students’ images of science and science learning and their science career choices. Korean Association for Science Education, 29(8), 934-950.
- Lee, K. (2002). Image three kingdoms. Gyeonggi: Dulnyouk Publication Co.
- Lee, S. (2016). The change of image on science subjects of high school students studied convergence science by the semantic differential method -focused on chemistry-. Master' thesis. Korea National University of Education. Chung-Buk.
- Lee, Y., & Im, S. (2013). University students’self-efficacy about physics learning. New Physics: Sae Mulli, 63(4), 423-431. https://doi.org/10.3938/NPSM.63.423
- Lim, J., Jin, Y., & Cho, A. (2016). Youth worker’s image perceived by youth. Forum For Youth Culture, 48, 87-108. https://doi.org/10.17854/ffyc.2016.10.48.87
- Mattson, R. E., Rogge, R. D., Johnson, M. D., Davidson, E. K. B., & Fincham, F. D. (2013). The positive and negative semantic dimensions of relationship satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 20(2), 328-355. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2012.01412.x
- Mun, K., Mun, J., Shin, S., & Kim, S. (2014). Development and application of high school students’ physics self-efficacy. Korean Association for Science Education, 34(7), 693-701. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.7.0693
- Murakami, T., & Kroonenberg, P. M. (2003). Three-mode models and individual differences in semantic differential data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38(2), 247-283. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327906MBR3802_5
- Nissen, J. M., & Shemwell, J. T. (2016). Gender, experience, and self-efficacy in introductory physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(2), 1-16.
- Norbergh, K. Helin, Y. Dahl, A. Hellze'n, O., & Asplund, K. (2006). Nurses’ attitudes towards people with dementia: The semantic differential technique. Nursing Ethics, 13(3), 264-274. https://doi.org/10.1191/0969733006ne863oa
- Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Chicago University of Illinois press.
- Potter, W., Webb, D., Paul, C., West, E., Bowen, M., Weiss, B., Coleman, L., & Leone, C. D. (2014). Sixteen years of collaborative learning through active sense-making in physics (CLASP) at UC Davis. American Journal of Physics, 82(2), 153-163. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4857435
- Reynolds, T. J., & Gutman, J. (1984). Advertising is image management. Journal of Advertising Research, 24, 27-37.
- Ryoo, Y., & Choi, Y. (2005). Study on images middle and high school students toward technology education through semantic differential method. The Journal of Practical Arts Education Research, 11(2), 141-156.
- Schlag, P. A., Yoder, D. G., & Sheng, Z. (2015). Words matter: A semantic differential study of recreation, leisure, play, activity, and sport. A Journal of Leisure Studies and Recreation Education, 1, 25-38.
- Seong, T. (2005). Understanding of educational research methods. Seoul: Hakjisa Publication Co.
- Shannon, A. G. (1979). Mathematical attitudes and semantic differentials. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 10(4), 497-507. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739790100403
- Skrandies, W. (2011). The structure of semantic meaning: A developmental study. Japanese Psychological Research, 53(1), 65-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5884.2010.00456.x
- Thomas, J. A., Pedersen, J. E., & Finson, K. (2001). Validating the Draw-A-Science-Teacher-Test Checklist (DASTT-C): Exploring mental models and teacher beliefs. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12(3), 295-310. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014216328867
- You, J., & Kwon, D. (2009). The study on the images of elementary school teachers by semantic differential method. The Journal of Elementary Education Studies, 16(1), 85-100.
- Williams, C., Stanisstreet, M., Spall, K., Boyes E., & Dickson, D. (2003). Why aren't secondary students interested in physics? Physics Education, 38, 324. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/38/4/306
- Zhang, P., Ding, L., & Mazur, E. (2017). Peer Instruction in introductory physics: A method to bring about positive changes in students’ attitudes and beliefs. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(1), 1-9.