Is this passage saying that experience is more important than intuition in developing scientirc discovery or theories? This is really hard to understand.
What do "phenomena" represent? It's too vague, does it mean "something that can trigger a scientific finding"?
28)In an analysis by Marton et al. (1994), 42 of 72 Nobel laureates were unable to comment on how they had developed scientific intuition. The others felt that it was based on knowledge of the particular subject of their research, acquired through and used in extensive experience of that subject. There then seems to be a need for students gifted in science to focus on phenomena that will sustain their attention over a long period of time. In this way they will acquire a wide amount of information about, and experience of, such phenomena. In doing so, they will acquire an emergent understanding of the nature of science, which will provide an overview on what is being done in specific instances and will shape the evaluation of the significance of those instances. It will also be associated with the development of those skills that can be conjectured as underlying the exercise of intuition: the use of analogies, the production of visualizations.