本研究欲探討九年級學生固有的力學迷思概念類型及分布情形，並分析持有不同迷思概念的學生，在進行力圖分析時，是否會被特定的迷思概念干擾或產生其他影響。
研究首先以修改自Force Concept Inventory(FCI)的「力與運動物理觀念評量」，檢測46名九年級學生所持有的牛頓力學迷思概念並將其分類，並從各類型的學生，邀請2~3位表達流暢且具代表性的學生，讓學生完成「力圖分析評量」並進行測後晤談，以找出迷思概念與力圖分析的關聯性。
研究結果顯示：1. 經「力與運動物理觀念評量」(alpha信度值為.75)測得，學生主要具有「衝力迷思」及「作用力與反作用力迷思」。2.學生面臨相同概念但不同的情境的題目時，受各類迷思影響的程度也不同。3.學生容易將速度與加速度兩者混淆 。4.學生無法正確進行力圖分析的原因有二，其一為分析力圖的步驟有誤，一開始就列出所有已知力，再由牛頓三大定律去拼湊出未知的力，容易誤判摩擦力和空氣阻力的方向。其二為對各種力如正向力、摩擦力、浮力、磁力的認識不足，造成學生在進行力圖分析時，易誤判這些力的方向、或將不知來源與種類的力隨意以這些作用力解讀、或是直接忽略這些作用力。
學生遇到同概念卻不同情境、不同題型的題目時，有時會將之視為不同概念的題目，因而產生不同的解題特徵與解題步驟。因此在檢測學生所具有的迷思概念類型時，同一種迷思概念最好以兩種以上的情境、題型做檢測，方能精確掌握學生所具有的迷思概念。
另外，本研究分析出具特定力學迷思的學生，在特定情境下易持有之力圖分析解題特徵，將可提供第一線教師在教學時做參考，使其能根據解題特徵，找出學生可能持有的迷思。

The purpose of the paper was to investigate the types and the distribution of misconception the ninth-grade students about the topic of mechanics. The researcher examined the interference or the influence of the certain misconceptions shown by the students with different types of misconceptions when they were doing analysis of free-body force diagram.
First, the paper was based on a modified adoption of Force Concept Inventory(FCI), examining the misconceptions of ninth-grade students, and classifying them. The researcher invited 2 to 3 students who are representative in various types and can express their ideas clearly, and then interviewed them. After examining and interviewing, the analysis was to identify the relation between misconception and free-body force diagram analysis.
This paper indicated the following results. First, with FCI, it is certain that students possess misconception of impetus and action/reaction pair mostly. Second, the impetus and action/reaction pair are not an important factor while students were doing force diagram analysis. Third, the misconception of mechanics was a major factor in students’ free-body diagram analysis. With the unclear ideas between force and motion, the students with this misconception made a wrong cognition that composition of forces determines the direction of the movement and composition of forces was a kind of force.
Finally, there are two factors influencing the process of making correct free-body diagram analysis. One, the procedure of analysis was not correct. Students listed all the forces and then guesses the unknown force according their understanding about Newton’s laws. They made a wrong judgment on the direction of friction and air resistance. The other factor is the unclear and poor concept of forces, such as normal force, friction, buoyancy, and magnetic force as well. The inadequate cognition determined the way students made analysis. The wrong direction of the forces was determined. Moreover, the forces were easily omitted or arbitrarily interpreted.

The result shows that students will take different procedures and show different action for answering question although the questions are based on the same concept, but set in different situations or types. Therefore, it is suggested that teachers whose aim is to identify the misconceptions of students correctly can set the questions with various situations or types but based on the same concept.
In addition, the findings which were revealed when students did analyses can be helpful for teaching. Teachers can identify the misconception according to the action of answering questions.

江慶育(2011)。 國三學生在浮力情境中對作用力辨識與力平衡理解之探討。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所在職進修碩士班論文，未出版，台北市。
邱韻如(2006a)。大一普物教學的迷思之我見。物理雙月刊，28(3)，554-562。
邱韻如(2006b）。從學生對牛頓第三定律的迷思概念探討教學上的一些問題。劉湘瑤（主持人），多元素養與科學教育。中華民國第22 屆科學教育學術研討會，國立臺灣師範大學公館校區。
邱韻如(2012)。此力非彼力-從力與能的迷思到教學的力有未逮。物理教育學刊，13(2)，156-159。
郭重吉(1989)。從認知觀點探討科學教育的理論與實際。台北：國科會科教處。
陳忠志(1987)。力學錯誤概念與教學成效之關係。台北：行政院國科會專案研究計畫報告，158-176頁。
陳美齡(2012)。國中學生力與運動解題歷程之研究。(碩士論文) 國立新竹教育大學，新竹市。取自http://handle.ncl.edu.tw/11296/ndltd/82464624161154904375
陳啟明、陳瓊森(1992)。發展紙筆測驗以探究高一學生對直流電路的迷思概念。科學教育學刊，3，21-72。
陳榮祥(2002)。西方科學哲學發展之初探。28，43-57。
張川木(1996)。孩童學習概念與課程設計。科學月刊，314。
張慧貞(2007)。創新物理教材教法：理論與錦囊。台中：逢甲大學出版社。
楊其安、郭重吉(1990)。利用臨床唔談探究國中學生對力學概念的另有架構。 科學教育，(1)，37-59。
萬淑宜（2011）。海峽兩岸國中自然教科書之內容分析比較—以牛頓力學為例。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。
謝青龍(1995)。 從「迷思概念」到「另有架構」的概念改變。科學教育月刊，180，23-29。

蔡興國、陳錦章、張惠博(2010)。高中學生解題歷程之力圖表徵與列式關係之研究。科學教育學刊，18(2)，155-175。
蔡興國、張惠博、陳錦章(2011)。使用系統基模促進高中學生改變力的迷思概念及正確描繪力圖表徵之研究。科學教育研究與發展季刊，63，1-36。
Clement, J. (1982). Students’ preconceptions in introductory mechanics. American Journal of physics, 50(1), 66-71.
Clement, J. (1987). The use of analogies and anchoring intuitions to remediate misconceptions in mechanics. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC, 20-24, April.
Champagne, A. B., Gunstone, R. F., & Klopfer, L. E. (1982). A perspective on the differences between expert and novice performance in solving physics problems. Research in Science Education, 12(1), 71-77.
Chang, W. (2005). Beyond misconceptions: Socio-cultural pitfalls in learning Newton's Law. Paper presented at the 36th Conference of Australasian Science Education Research Association (ASERA), Hamilton, New Zealand, 6-9, July.
Chi, M. T., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive science, 5(2), 121-152.
Chi, M. T., Slotta, J. D., & De Leeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Learning and instruction, 4(1), 27-43.
Court, J. E. (1993). Free-body diagrams. The Physics Teacher, 31(2), 104-108.
Court, J. E. (1999). Free-body diagrams revisited—I. The Physics Teacher, 37(7), 427-433.
Driver, R., Guesne, E. & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s ideas in science. Maidenhead, UK:Open University Press.
Fisher, K. M. (1985). A misconception in biology: Amino acids and translation. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 22(1), 53-62.
Galili, I., & Kaplan, D. (1996). Students’ operations with the weight concept. Science Education, 80(4), 457-487.
Giancoli, D. (1998). Physics—Principles with applications (5th ed.). New York, NY: Prentice-Hall International.
Gil‐Perez, D., & Carrascosa, J. (1990). What to do about science “misconceptions”. Science Education, 74(5), 531-540.
Hake, R. (2002). Lessons from the physics education reform effort. Conservation Ecology, 5(2).
Halloun, I. A., & Hestenes, D. (1985). The initial knowledge state of college physics students. American Journal of Physics, 53(11), 1043-1055.
Heckler, A. F. (2010). Some consequences of prompting novice physics students to construct force diagrams. International Journal of Science Education, 32(14), 1829-1851.
Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force Concept Inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30(3), 141-158
Hestenes, D. (1995). Modeling software for learning and doing physics. In C. Bernardini, C. Tarsitani, & M. Vincentini (Eds.), Thinking Physics for Teaching (pp. 25-66). New York,NY: Plenum.
Kohl, P. B., Rosengrant, D., & Finkelstein, N. D. (2007). Strongly and weakly directed approaches to teaching multiple representation use in physics. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 3(1), 010108.
Mallinson, G. G.(1977). A summary of research in science education – 1975. Science Education, 61.
Maloney, D. P. (1990). Forces as interactions. The Physics Teacher, 28(6), 386-390.
McCloskey, M. (1983). Naive theories of motion. Mental models, 299-324.
Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science education, 66(2), 211-227.
Puri, A. (1996). The Art of Free-Body Diagrams. Physics Education, 31(3), 155-57.
Reif, F. (1995). Millikan Lecture 1994: Understanding and teaching important scientific thought processes. American Journal of Physics, 63, 17-32.
Rosengrant, D., Van Heuvelen, A., & Etkina, E. (2005, September). Free‐Body Diagrams: Necessary or Sufficient? In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 790, No. 1, pp. 177-180). College Park, MD:AIP.
Savinainen, A., & Scott, P. (2002a). The Force Concept Inventory: a tool for monitoring student learning. Physics Education, 37(1), 45-52.
Savinainen, A., & Scott, P. (2002b). Using the Force Concept Inventory to monitor student learning and to plan teaching. Physics Education, 37(1), 53-58.
Savinainen, A., Scott, P., & Viiri, J. (2005). Using a bridging representation and social interactions to foster conceptual change: Designing and evaluating an instructional sequence for Newton’s third law. Science Education, 89(2), 175-195.
Terry, C., & Jones, G. (1986). Alternative frameworks: Newton's third law and conceptual change. European Journal of Science Education, 8(3), 291-298.
Thijs, G. D. (1992). Evaluation of introductory course on 'force' considering students' preconceptions. Science Education, 76(2), 155-174.
Thornton, R. K., & Sokoloff, D. R. (1998). Assessing student learning of Newton’s laws: The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation and the Evaluation of Active Learning Laboratory and Lecture Curricula. American Association of Physics Teachers., 66(4), 338-352.
Turner, L. (2003). System schemas. The Physics Teacher, 41(7), 404-408.
Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive psychology, 24(4), 535-585.
Watts, D. M., & Zylbersztajn, A. (1981). A survey of some children's ideas about force. Physics Education, 16(6), 360.
Whiteley, P. (1996). Using free body diagrams as a diagnostic instrument. Physic Education, 31(5), 309-313.