Students often hold intuitive misconceptions that coexist with scientifically normative understanding. A growing body of research suggests that inhibitory control plays an important role in resolving such interference by suppressing misconception based responses. In science learning, however, the same underlying concept is often encountered through multiple external representations, which may repeatedly activate similar misconceptions. It therefore remains unclear whether inhibitory control is also involved when the same concept is expressed in different but closely related representation formats. Extending prior findings on inhibitory control in stroboscopic representation involving the position–velocity indiscrimination (PVI) misconception, the present research examined whether similar demands on inhibitory control arise in position–time graph representations. To address this question, we conducted two studies using a negative priming (NP) paradigm, with eye tracking added in Study 2. Study 1 involved 45 high school students and tested whether inhibitory control was involved in overcoming the PVI misconception in position–time graphs. Study 2 involved 37 physics major undergraduates and further examined how attentional allocation unfolded during this process. In both studies, congruent probes following incongruent primes elicited slower responses than congruent probes following neutral primes, indicating a reliable NP effect. In Study 1, probe accuracy was also lower after incongruent primes. Eye tracking in Study 2 further showed that, during incongruent primes, participants oriented earlier to graph regions in which the two objects occupied the same position, whereas access to the graph region indicating equal velocity, defined by equal slope, was delayed relative to neutral primes. In the probe stage, congruent probes following incongruent primes elicited later entry into, and greater attentional investment on, the graph region that contained the scientifically relevant cue for making the correct velocity judgment. Taken together, these findings suggest that the PVI misconception is activated early, competes for attentional resources, and requires inhibitory control together with attentional reallocation toward scientifically relevant information. More broadly, considered alongside prior evidence from stroboscopic representations, the present results provide initial evidence that the inhibitory demands associated with overcoming the PVI misconception may generalize across closely related visual representations of the same kinematic concept. This study advances understanding of the cognitive processes underlying physics learning and offers implications for instruction aimed at mitigating persistent misconceptions.