- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Comparing students’ understanding of electric and magnetic fields and forces with parallel multiple-choice questions

Eder Hernandez1, Esmeralda Campos2, Pablo Barniol3, and Genaro Zavala1,4,*

  • *Contact author: genaro.zavala@tec.mx
PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 22, 010127 – Published 5 March, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/7qnx-zmmx

Abstract

Understanding the parallelism between electric and magnetic phenomena can be challenging for students in introductory physics courses. This study compares students’ understanding of electric and magnetic fields and forces using parallel multiple-choice questions. Most of the electricity items were drawn from our previously published Test of Understanding of Electric Field, Force, and Flux (TU-E3F), while the magnetism items were newly developed as parallel questions based on the results of our earlier studies. The participants in the present study were 232 engineering students enrolled in a calculus-based electricity and magnetism course at a private university in the northeast of Mexico. We administered a five-item electricity test and a parallel five-item magnetism test to two independent groups of 116 students each and analyzed item difficulty and response patterns using chi-square tests. In this article, we compare students’ performance on parallel items and identify significant differences in the selection of the correct answers and incorrect answers. We also analyze the items by level of difficulty and identify the most frequent incorrect answers. Analysis of incorrect-answer categories highlighted recurrent difficulties with field representations, superposition, and “larger implies larger” reasoning, as well as interference between electric and magnetic ideas. Based on these results, we provide specific recommendations for improving instruction on these concepts. The analyses and recommendations can serve as valuable resources for physics education researchers and instructors teaching these topics. This study offers insights into how context influences students’ conceptual understanding, with implications for enhancing electricity and magnetism education.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (66)

  1. D. P. Maloney, T. L. O’Kuma, C. J. Hieggelke, and A. Van Heuvelen, Surveying students’ conceptual knowledge of electricity and magnetism, Am. J. Phys. 69, S12 (2001).
  2. T. M. Scaife and A. F. Heckler, Interference between electric and magnetic concepts in introductory physics, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 7, 010104 (2011).
  3. E. Hernández, E. Campos, P. Barniol, and G. Zavala, The effect of similar surface features on students’ understanding of the interaction of charges with electric and magnetic fields, presented at PER Conf. 2019, 10.1119/perc.2019.pr.Hernandez.
  4. E. Campos, E. Hernandez, P. Barniol, and G. Zavala, Phenomenographic analysis and comparison of students’ conceptual understanding of electric and magnetic fields and the principle of superposition, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 020117 (2021).
  5. E. Hernandez, E. Campos, P. Barniol, and G. Zavala, Comparing students’ understanding of Gauss’s and Ampere’s laws with field sources in square-like symmetries, presented at PER Conf. 2021, virtual conference, 10.1119/perc.2021.pr.Hernandez.
  6. M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser, and E. Rees, Expertise in Problem Solving (Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, 1981).
  7. A. Samsudin, A. Suhandi, D. Rusdiana, I. Kaniawati, and B. Coştu, Fields conceptual change inventory: A diagnostic test instrument on the electric field and magnetic field to diagnose students’ conceptions, Int. J. Ind. Electron. Electr. Eng. 3, 74 (2015), https://ijieee.org.in/paper_detail.php?paper_id=3559&name=Fields_Conceptual_Change_Inventory:_A_Diagnostic_Test_Instrument_On_The_Electric_Field_And_Magnetic_Field_To_Diagnose_Student%E2%80%99s_Conceptions.
  8. A. Samsudin, A. Suhandi, D. Rusdiana, I. Kaniawati, N. J. Fratiwi, A. Zulfikar, and B. Coştu, Optimizing students’ conceptual understanding on electricity and magnetism through Cognitive Conflict-Based Multimode Teaching (CC-BMT), J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1204, 012027 (2019).
  9. A. Garza and G. Zavala, Contrasting students’ understanding of electric field and electric force, AIP Conf. Proc. 1513, 142 (2013).
  10. J. L. Docktor and J. P. Mestre, Synthesis of discipline-based education research in physics, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 10, 020119 (2014).
  11. E. Campos, G. Zavala, K. Zuza, and J. Guisasola, Electric field lines: The implications of students’ interpretation on their understanding of the concept of electric field and of the superposition principle, Am. J. Phys. 87, 660 (2019).
  12. A. Samsudin, A. Suhandi, D. Rusdiana, I. Kaniawati, and B. Coştu, Promoting conceptual understanding on magnetic field concept through Interactive Conceptual Instruction (ICI) with PDEODE*E tasks, Adv. Sci. Lett. 23, 1205 (2017).
  13. Z. Tanel and M. Erol, Students’ difficulties in understanding the concepts of magnetic field strength, magnetic flux density and magnetization, Lat. Am. J. Phys. Educ. 2, 184 (2008), https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=2734609.
  14. E. Hernandez, E. Campos, P. Barniol, and G. Zavala, Students’ conceptual understanding of electric flux and magnetic circulation, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 19, 013102 (2023).
  15. K. H. Philippi, An examination of student understanding of the use of models in science and conceptual understanding of electricity and magnetism, Ph.D. dissertation, University of New Orleans, 2010.
  16. J. Li, Improving students’ understanding of electricity and magnetism, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 2012.
  17. D. Hestenes, M. Wells, and G. Swackhamer, Force Concept Inventory, Phys. Teach. 30, 141 (1992).
  18. G. Tarjányiová and P. Hockicko, The supplementary education of physics for incoming STEM students—Force Concept Inventory during years 2020–2022, in Proceedings of the 2024 ELEKTRO (IEEE, New York, 2024), pp. 1–6, 10.1109/ELEKTRO60337.2024.10557024.
  19. S. D. Fatmaryanti and H. Kurniawan, Magnetic force learning with Guided Inquiry and Multiple Representations Model (GIMuR) to enhance students’ mathematics modeling ability, Asia-Pac. Forum Sci. Learn. Teach. 19, 1 (2018), https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/v19_issue1/siskadesy/.
  20. A. F. Heckler and T. M. Scaife, Adding and subtracting vectors: The problem with the arrow representation, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 11, 010101 (2015).
  21. E. Hernández, E. Campos, P. Barniol, and G. Zavala, Phenomenographic analysis of students’ conceptual understanding of electric and magnetic interactions using open-ended parallel items, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 18, 020101 (2022).
  22. E. Hernandez, E. Campos, P. Barniol, and G. Zavala, Test of understanding of electric field, force, and flux: A reliable multiple-choice assessment tool, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 21, 010156 (2025).
  23. P. van Kampen and M. De Cock, Students’ understandings of electricity, and magnetism, in The International Handbook of Physics Education Research: Learning Physics, edited by M. F. Taşar and P. R. L. Heron (AIP Publishing, Melville, NY, 2023), pp. 5-1–5-24, 10.1063/9780735425477_005.
  24. E. Campos, G. Zavala, K. Zuza, and J. Guisasola, Students’ understanding of the concept of the electric field through conversions of multiple representations, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 010135 (2020).
  25. L. Ding, R. Chabay, B. Sherwood, and R. Beichner, Evaluating an electricity and magnetism assessment tool: Brief electricity and magnetism assessment, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 2, 010105 (2006).
  26. E. Bilal and M. Erol, Investigating students’ conceptions of some electricity concepts, Lat. Am. J. Phys. Educ. 3, 2201 (2009), https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=3689820.
  27. E. Hernandez and G. Zavala, Accurate items for inaccurate conceptions in undergraduate physics students, in Handbook of Research on Driving STEM Learning with Educational Technologies (IGI Global, Hershey, PA, 2017), pp. 315–341, 10.4018/978-1-5225-2026-9.ch016.
  28. P. Barniol, E. Campos, and G. Zavala, La prueba conceptual de electricidad y magnetismo: Análisis de confiabilidad y estudio de las dificultades más frecuentes, Enseñanza Cienc. 36, 165 (2018).
  29. J. Guisasola, J. M. Almudi, and J. L. Zubimendi, Difficulties in learning the introductory magnetic field theory in the first years of university, Sci. Educ. 88, 443 (2004).
  30. M. Saarelainen, A. Laaksonen, and P. E. Hirvonen, Students’ initial knowledge of electric and magnetic fields—More profound explanations and reasoning models for undesired conceptions, Eur. J. Phys. 28, 51 (2006).
  31. S. D. Fatmaryanti, Attainment of students’ conception in magnetic fields by using direct observation and symbolic language ability, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 909, 012058 (2017).
  32. M. Lemmer and O. N. Morabe, Concept confusion and concept discernment in basic magnetism using analogical reasoning, Phys. Educ. 52, 045002 (2017).
  33. S. L. Mitchem, D. Zohrabi Alaee, and E. C. Sayre, Student understanding of electric and magnetic fields in materials, Am. J. Phys. 85, 705 (2017).
  34. A. Suárez, A. C. Martí, K. Zuza, and J. Guisasola, Las relaciones causa-efecto en las ecuaciones de Maxwell y sus implicancias en la enseñanza del electromagnetismo en los cursos introductorios de física, Rev. Bras. Ensino Fís. 44, e20220230 (2022).
  35. A. Hekkenberg, M. Lemmer, and P. Dekkers, An analysis of teachers’ concept confusion concerning electric and magnetic fields, Afr. J. Res. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 19, 34 (2015).
  36. S. R. Singer, N. R. Nielsen, and H. A. Schweingruber, Problem solving, spatial thinking, and the use of representations in science and engineering, in Discipline-Based Education Research: Understanding and Improving Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2012), pp. 75–118, 10.17226/13362.
  37. E. Campos and G. Zavala, A look into students’ interpretation of electric field lines, in Handbook of Research on Driving STEM Learning With Educational Technologies (IGI Global, Hershey, PA, 2017), pp. 342–364, 10.4018/978-1-5225-2026-9.ch017.
  38. E. Campos and G. Zavala, Uso de la representación de líneas de campo eléctrico por parte de profesores de electricidad y magnetismo, in Proceedings of the XIV Congreso Nacional de Investigación Educativa (COMIE), San Luis Potosí, Mexico (Consejo Mexicano de Investigación Educativa, Mexico City, 2017).
  39. C. Singh, Student understanding of symmetry and Gauss’s law of electricity, Am. J. Phys. 74, 923 (2006).
  40. J. Li and C. Singh, Investigating and improving introductory physics students’ understanding of the electric field and superposition principle, Eur. J. Phys. 38, 055702 (2017).
  41. J. Leppävirta, The effect of naïve ideas on students’ reasoning about electricity and magnetism, Res. Sci. Educ. 42, 753 (2012).
  42. A. A. diSessa, Toward an epistemology of physics, Cognit. Instr. 10, 105 (1993).
  43. S. N. Mufida, A. Samsudin, and D. Rusdiana, Lorentz Force Practicum Tool (LoFoPaT): Enhancing students’ conceptual understanding in physics, Tadris J. Keguruan Ilmu Tarbiyah 9, 223 (2024).
  44. T. M. Scaife and A. F. Heckler, Student understanding of the direction of the magnetic force on a charged particle, Am. J. Phys. 78, 869 (2010).
  45. S. Tecpan, J. Benegas, and G. Zavala, Entendimiento conceptual y dificultades de aprendizaje de electricidad y magnetismo identificadas por profesores, Lat. Am. J. Phys. Educ. 9, 1401 (2015), https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=5505190.
  46. M. Başer and Ö. Geban, Effect of instruction based on conceptual change activities on students’ understanding of static electricity concepts, Res. Sci. Technol. Educ. 25, 243 (2007).
  47. R. Dilber and R. Salar, Effect of conceptual change instruction on students’ understanding of electricity concepts, in New Perspectives in Science Education, Conference Proceedings (Filodiritto Editore, Florence, Italy, 2014), p. 387.
  48. E. Campos, E. Hernandez, P. Barniol, and G. Zavala, Learning interference between electricity and magnetism? Analysis of patterns and consistency, Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 19, em2302 (2023).
  49. M. De Cock, Representation use, and strategy choice in physics problem solving, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 8, 020117 (2012).
  50. C. Singh, Assessing student expertise in introductory physics with isomorphic problems. II. Effect of some potential factors on problem solving and transfer, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 4, 010105 (2008).
  51. E. Campos, E. Hernandez, P. Barniol, and G. Zavala, Analysis and comparison of students’ conceptual understanding of symmetry arguments in Gauss’s and Ampere’s laws, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 19, 010103 (2023).
  52. M. S. Setia, Methodology series module 3: Cross-sectional studies, Indian J. Dermatol. 61, 261 (2016).
  53. D. J. Sheskin, Handbook of Parametric and Nonparametric Statistical Procedures, 4th ed. (Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 2007), 10.1201/9781420036268.
  54. T. Kline, Psychological Testing: A Practical Approach to Design and Evaluation (SAGE, Thousand Oaks, 2005), 10.4135/9781483385693.
  55. J. Barbera, A psychometric analysis of the Chemical Concepts Inventory, J. Chem. Educ. 90, 546 (2013).
  56. R. L. Ebel, Essentials of Educational Measurement (Prentice-Hall, Oxford, 1972).
  57. P. Barniol and G. Zavala, Force, velocity, and work: The effects of different contexts on students’ understanding of vector concepts using isomorphic problems, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 10, 020115 (2014).
  58. R. W. Chabay and B. A. Sherwood, Matter & Interactions II: Electric and Magnetic Interactions, 2nd ed. (Wiley, New York, 2007).
  59. L. Viennot, Spontaneous reasoning in elementary dynamics, Eur. J. Sci. Educ. 1, 205 (1979).
  60. I. Galili, Mechanics background influences students’ conceptions in electromagnetism, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 17, 371 (1995).
  61. H. D. Young and R. A. Freedman, University Physics with Modern Physics, 13th ed. (Pearson, Mexico, 2013).
  62. L. C. McDermott and P. S. Shaffer, Tutorials in Introductory Physics (Pearson Education, Buenos Aires, 2001).
  63. T. M. Scaife and A. F. Heckler, The effect of field representation on student responses to magnetic force questions, AIP Conf. Proc. 951, 180 (2007).
  64. C. Singh and D. Haileselassie, Developing problem-solving skills of students taking introductory physics via web-based tutorials, J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 39, 42 (2010), https://www.learntechlib.org/p/108402/.
  65. C. A. Manogue, K. Browne, T. Dray, and B. Edwards, Why is Ampère’s law so hard? A look at middle-division physics, Am. J. Phys. 74, 344 (2006).
  66. R. E. Pepper, S. V. Chasteen, S. J. Pollock, and K. K. Perkins, Observations on student difficulties with mathematics in upper-division electricity and magnetism, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 8, 010111 (2012).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 22, 010127– Published 5 March, 2026
  • Received 5 November 2025
  • Accepted 5 February 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation