Systematic Literature Review: Three-Tier Diagnostic Test to Identifying Misconceptions in Chemistry
DOI:
10.29303/jppipa.v11i7.11011Published:
2025-07-25Downloads
Abstract
This study presents a literature review on the use of the three-tier diagnostic test in identifying students’ misconceptions in chemistry and offers insights into its effectiveness in educational evaluation. A literature review of studies from 2019 to 2024 shows that 71.43% of these tests use close-ended questions due to their efficiency in terms of time, cost, and data analysis, compared to 28.57% that use open-ended questions. Research findings indicate that this test has successfully identified misconceptions in various chemistry topics, such as equilibrium, chemical bonding, ionization energy, and acids-bases. The ability of the three-tier diagnostic test to detect misconceptions makes it an effective tool for improving students’ conceptual understanding. The findings indicate that the three-tier diagnostic test has been widely used to uncover students’ conceptual difficulties across various chemistry topics. Its use has shown promise in supporting more accurate and in-depth assessments compared to traditional evaluation methods. The review suggests that this type of diagnostic testing can enhance the quality of formative assessments and contribute to improved instructional planning.
Keywords:
Chemistry Close-ended Misconception Open-ended Three-tier diagnostic testReferences
Baburajan, V., de Abreu e Silva, J., & Pereira, F. C. (2022). Open vs Closed-Ended Questions in Attitudinal Surveys – Comparing, Combining, and Interpreting Using Natural Language Processing. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 137, 103589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2022.103589 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2022.103589
Barke, H.-D., Hazari, A., & Yitbarek, S. (2009). Students’ Misconceptions and How to Overcome Them. Misconceptions in Chemistry, 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70989-3_3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70989-3_3
Behmke, D. A., & Atwood, C. H. (2013). Implementation and Assessment of Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) Based Questions in an Electronic Homework and Testing System. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(3), 247–256. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP20153H DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP20153H
Bingölbali, E., Bingölbali, F., & Prof, A. (2021). An Examination of Open-Ended Mathematics Questions’ Affordances. International Journal of Progressive Education, 17(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2021.366.1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2021.366.1
Birenbaum, M., & Tatsuoka, K. K. (1987). Open-Ended Versus Multiple-Choice Response Formats—It Does Make a Difference for Diagnostic Purposes. Applied Psychological Measurement, 11(4), 385–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168701100404 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168701100404
Caleon, I. S., & Subramaniam, R. (2010). Do Students Know What They Know and What They Don’t Know? Using a Four-Tier Diagnostic Test to Assess the Nature of Students’ Alternative Conceptions. Research in Science Education, 40(3), 313–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9122-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9122-4
Cooper, C., Booth, A., Varley-Campbell, J., Britten, N., & Garside, R. (2018). Defining the Process to Literature Searching in Systematic Reviews: A Literature Review of Guidance and Supporting Studies. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/S12874-018-0545-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0545-3
Desai, S., & Reimers, S. (2019). Comparing the Use of Open and Closed Questions for Web-Based Measures of the Continued-Influence Effect. Behavior Research Methods, 51(3), 1426–1440. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1066-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1066-z
Ekawisudawati, E., Wijaya, M., & Danial, M. (2021). Analisis Miskonsepsi Peserta Didik pada Materi Asam Basa Menggunakan Instrumen Three-Tier Diagnostic Test. Chemistry Education Review (CER), 5(1), 62–72. https://doi.org/10.26858/ cer.v5i1.26359 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26858/cer.v5i1.26359
Fanani, R. D., Supardi, Z. A. I., & Suprapto, N. (2023). The Development of HOTS-Based Question Instrument in Temperature and Heat Material. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(9), 6890–6895. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i9.3282 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i9.3282
Fanfiana, R. O., Hadisaputra, S., & Supriadi, S. (2024). Identification of Student Misconceptions Using A Three-Tier Test on The Concept of Atoms, Ions, and Molecules. Chemistry Education Practice, 7(1), 75–81. https://doi.org/10.29303/cep.v7i1.6133 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/cep.v7i1.6133
Farzad, M., MacDermid, J. C., Lu, Z., & Shafiee, E. (2020). Validation of Persian Version of Patient-Rated Wrist and Hand Evaluation: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Rasch Analysis. Archives of Rehabilitation Research and Clinical Translation, 2(4), 100076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arrct.2020.100076 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arrct.2020.100076
Febliza, A., Kadarohman, A., Aisyah, S., & Abdullah, N. (2024). Development and Validation of a Three-Tier Test for Identifying Misconceptions in Organic Chemistry Course. Journal of Innovative Science Education, 13(3), 124–133. https://doi.org/10.15294/jise.v13i3.13578
Gurel, D. K., Eryilmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2015). A Review and Comparison of Diagnostic Instruments to Identify Students’ Misconceptions in Science. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(5), 989–1008. https://doi.org/10.12973/ eurasia.2015.1369a DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1369a
Gusmanida, G., Sujati, H., & Herwin, H. (2024). Testing the Construct Validity and Reliability of the Student Learning Motivation Scale Using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 10(7), 4227–4234. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i7.7518 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i7.7518
Hale, L. V. A., Lutter, J. C., & Shultz, G. V. (2016). The Development of a Tool for Measuring Graduate Students’ Topic Specific Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Thin Layer Chromatography. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(4), 700–710. https://doi.org/10.1039/c5rp00190k DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RP00190K
Irfandi, I., Murwindra, R., Musdansi, D. P., N, W. A., & Hanri, C. (2022). Identification and Analysis of Students’ Misconceptions Using Three-Tier Multiple Choice Diagnostic Instruments on Thermochemistry Topic. IJECA (International Journal of Education and Curriculum Application), 5(3), 306–316. https://doi.org/10.31764/ ijeca.v5I3.11613 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31764/ijeca.v5i3.11613
Istiyani, R., Muchyidin, A., & Rahardjo, D. H. (2018). Analysis of Student Misconception on Geometry Concepts Using Three-Tier Diagnostic Test. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 37(2), 261628. https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v37i2.14493 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v37i2.14493
Johnstone, A. H. (1993). The Development of Chemistry Teaching: A Changing Response to Changing Demand. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(9), 701–705. https://doi.org/10.1021/ ed070p701 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/ed070p701
Jusniar, J., Effendy, E., Budiasih, E., & Sutrisno, S. (2020). Developing a Three-Tier Diagnostic Instrument on Chemical Equilibrium (TT-DICE). Educación Química, 31(3), 84–102. https://doi.org/10.22201/ fq.18708404e.2020.3.72133 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/fq.18708404e.2020.3.72133
Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., & Ali, F. (2022). Advancing Knowledge Through Literature Reviews: ‘What’, ‘Why’, and ‘How to Contribute.’ The Service Industries Journal, 42(7–8), 481–513. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2022.2047941 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2022.2047941
Linnenluecke, M. K., Marrone, M., & Singh, A. K. (2020). Conducting Systematic Literature Reviews and Bibliometric Analyses. Australian Journal of Management, 45(2), 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896219877678 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896219877678
Lu, S., & Bi, H. (2016). Development of a Measurement Instrument to Assess Students’ Electrolyte Conceptual Understanding. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(4), 1030–1040. https://doi.org/10.1039/c6rp00137h DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00137H
Mardiyyaningsih, A. N., Erlina, E., Ulfah, M., & Wafiq, A. F. (2023). Validity and Reliability of the Two-tier Diagnostic Test to Identify Students’ Alternative Conceptions of Intermolecular Forces. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(6), 4375–4381. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i6.2797 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i6.2797
Marsh, H. W., Guo, J., Dicke, T., Parker, P. D., & Craven, R. G. (2020). Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM), and Set-ESEM: Optimal Balance Between Goodness of Fit and Parsimony. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 55(1), 102–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2019.1602503 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2019.1602503
Meiliyadi, L. A. D., Asyari, A., & Arizona, K. (2023). Identification of Tadris Biology Students Level Understanding and Misconceptions on the Material of Quantities and Units Using 3-Tier Diagnostic Method. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(12), 12042–12048. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i12.6122 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i12.6122
Mellyzar, M. (2021). Analysis of Understanding Chemical Bond Concepts in Students with Three-Tier Multiple Choice. JEC, 3(1), 53–66. https://doi.org/10.21580/ jec.2021.3.1.7560 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21580/jec.2021.3.1.7560
Mulyana, V., & Desnita, D. (2023). Empirical Validity and Reliability of the Scientific Literacy Assessment Instrument Based on the Tornado Physics Enrichment Book. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(5), 3961–3967. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i5.3290 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i5.3290
Natalia, P. D., & Sudrajat, A. (2023). Development of Three˗Tier Diagnostic Test Instrument to Measure Misconceptions of Class XI Students on Reaction Rate Materials. Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan: Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pembelajaran, 8(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.33394/jtp.v8i1.6192 DOI: https://doi.org/10.33394/jtp.v8i1.6192
Paul, J., & Criado, A. R. (2020). The Art of Writing Literature Review: What Do We Know and What Do We Need to Know? International Business Review, 29(4), 101717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2020.101717 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2020.101717
Prodjosantoso, A. K., Hertina, A. M., & Irwanto, I. (2019). The Misconception Diagnosis on Ionic and Covalent Bonds Concepts with Three Tier Diagnostic Test. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 1477–1488. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12194a DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12194a
Rismaningsih, F., & Nurhafsari, A. (2022). Identify Hydrostatic Misconceptions Using Four Tier Diagnostic Tests with the Help of iSpring Suite 9 (Case Study in UNIS Faculty of Engineering Students). Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 8(2), 773–780. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v8i2.1290 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v8i2.1290
Santoso, B., Marchira, C. R., & Sumarni, P. (2017). Development and Validity and Reliability Tests of Professionalism Assessment Instrument in Psychiatry Residents. Jurnal Pendidikan Kedokteran Indonesia: The Indonesian Journal of Medical Education, 6(1), 60–65. https://doi.org/10.22146/jpki.25369 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jpki.25369
Sari, D. N., Arif, K., Yurnetti, Y., & Putri, A. N. (2024). Identification of Students’ Misconceptions in Junior High Schools Accredited A Using the Three Tier Test Instrument in Science Learning. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 10(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i1.5064 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i1.5064
Selina, S., Muharini, R., Lestari, I., Masriani, M., & Rasmawan, R. (2024). Analysis of Understanding the Concept of Alkenes through the Three-tier Multiple Choice Diagnostic Test Instrument. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 10(6), 3463–3472. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i6.6510 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i6.6510
Septian, I. D., Susilaningsih, E., & Sumarti, S. S. (2020). A Misconception Analysis of Buffer Material Using Three Tier Multiple Choice Test assisted by CBT for SMAN 9 Semarang. Journal of Innovative Science Education, 9(1), 40–49. https://doi.org/10.15294/jise.v8i1.32027
Setiawan, N. C. E., & Ilahi, P. R. (2022). Identification of Misconceptions in Chemical Bonding Materials Using Three Tier Diagnostic Test. Journal of Natural Science and Integration, 5(1), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.24014/jnsi.v5i1.16860 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24014/jnsi.v5i1.16860
Shiddiqi, M. H. A., Arthamena, V. D., Ayyubi, M., Manarisip, A. J., & Aznam, N. (2024). Systematic Literature Review: Analysis of Misconception Problems and Diagnostic Instruments for Learning Chemistry. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 10(4), 168–179. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i4.5189 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i4.5189
Smith, B. (2018). Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Research Imagination. Journal of Perioperative Practice, 28(12), 318–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750458918810149 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1750458918810149
Suprapto, N. (2020). Do We Experience Misconceptions?: An Ontological Review of Misconceptions in Science. Studies in Philosophy of Science and Education, 1(2), 50–55. https://doi.org/10.46627/sipose.v1i2.24 DOI: https://doi.org/10.46627/sipose.v1i2.24
Swarni, A., Herwin, H., & Sujati, S. (2024). Testing the Construct Validity and Reliability of the Student Learning Interest Scale Using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 10(9), 6322–6330. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i9.8794 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i9.8794
Treagust, D. F., Chittleborough, G., & Mamiala, T. L. (2003). The Role of Submicroscopic and Symbolic Representations in Chemical Explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1353–1368. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000070306 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000070306
Vaingankar, J. A., Abdin, E., Dam, R. M. V., Chong, S. A., Tan, L. W. L., Sambasivam, R., Seow, E., Chua, B. Y., Wee, H. L., Lim, W. Y., & Subramaniam, M. (2020). Development and Validation of the Rapid Positive Mental Health Instrument (R-PMHI) for Measuring Mental Health Outcomes in the Population. BMC Public Health, 20(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-08569-w DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-08569-w
Wahyudi, A., Richardo, R., Eilks, I., & Kulgemeyer, C. (2023). Development of Three Tier Open-Ended Instrument to Measure Chemistry Students’ Critical Thinking Disposition Using Rasch Analysis. International Journal of Instruction, 16(3), 191–204. Retrieved from https://e-iji.net/ats/index.php/pub/article/view/76 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16311a
Wang, T. L., Dai, F., Hu, R., Seager, S., Febriyanti, F., Wiji, W., & Widhiyanti, T. (2019). Thermochemistry Multiple Representation Analysis for Developing Intertextual Learning Strategy Based on Predict Observe Explain (POE). Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(4), 042042. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/4/042042 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/4/042042
Wiji, W., Widhiyanti, T., Delisma, D., & Mulyani, S. (2021). The Intertextuality Study of the Conception, Threshold Concept, and Troublesome Knowledge on Redox Reaction. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 16(2), 1356–1369. Retrieved from https://jestec.taylors.edu.my/Vol%2016%20issue%202%20April%202021/16_2_33.pdf
Winarni, S., Effendy, E., Budiasih, E., Wonorahardjo, S., & Winarni, S. (2022). Constructing ‘Concept Approval Strategy,’ A Chemistry Learning Idea to Prevent Misconceptions. Educación Química, 33(2), 159–180. https://doi.org/10.22201/fq.18708404e.2022.2.79841 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/fq.18708404e.2022.2.79841
Winarsih, S., & Priatmoko, S. (2019). Analisis Pemahaman Konsep Menggunakan Three-Tier Multiple Choice Test pada Pembelajaran Hidrolisis Berbantuan Metode Blended Learning Berbasis Inkuiri Terbimbing. Chemistry in Education, 8(2), 29–36. Retrieved from https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/chemined/article/view/39128
Wolfswinkel, J. F., Furtmueller, E., & Wilderom, C. P. M. (2013). Using Grounded Theory as a Method for Rigorously Reviewing Literature. European Journal of Information Systems, 22(1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2011.51 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2011.51
Wren, D., & Barbera, J. (2014). Psychometric Analysis of the Thermochemistry Concept Inventory. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15(3), 380–390. https://doi.org/10.1039/c3rp00170a DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP00170A
Yusrizal, Y., & Halim, A. (2017). The Effect of The One-Tier, Two-Tier, and Three-Tier Diagnostic Test Toward the Students’ Confidence and Understanding Toward the Concepts of Atomic Nuclear. Unnes Science Education Journal, 6(2), 1583–1590. https://doi.org/10.15294/usej.v6i2.15856
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Beatrice Ruth Nathania Simanjuntak, Wiji Wiji, Tuszie Widhiyanti
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY License). This license allows authors to use all articles, data sets, graphics, and appendices in data mining applications, search engines, web sites, blogs, and other platforms by providing an appropriate reference. The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and will retain publishing rights without restrictions.
- Authors are able to 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 Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
