Development of intuitive rules: Evaluating the application of the dual-system framework to understanding children's intuitive reasoning

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 13, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 935-953

  Osman, Magda ^a   Stavy, Ruth ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34248138887     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03213907     Document Type: Review

References (114)

1. ADEY, P., SHAYER, M., &YATES, C. (2001). Thinking science: The materials of the CASE project (3rd ed.). Cheltenham, U.K.: Nelson Thornes.
2. AHL, V. A., MOORE, C. F., & DIXON, J. A. (1992). Development of intuitive and numerical proportional reasoning. Cognitive Development, 7,81-108.
3. ANDERSON, J. R. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. ANDERSON, N. H. (1987). Function knowledge: Comment on Reed and Evans. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116,297-299.
5. AZHARI, N. (1998). Using the intuitive rule "same of A, same of B " in conservation tasks. Unpublished manuscript, Tel Aviv University, Israel.
6. BABAI, R., & ALON, T. (2004). Intuitive thinking, cognitive level or grade level: What predicts students' incorrect responses in science and mathematics. Paper presented at the National Association of Research in Science Teaching Conference, Vancouver.
7. BABAI, R., BRECHER, T., STAVY, R., & TIROSH, D. (2006). Intuitive interference in probabilistic reasoning. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 4, 627-639.
8. BABAI, R., LEVYADUN, T., STAVY, R., & TIROSH, D. (2006). Intuitive rules in science and mathematics: A reaction time study. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science & Technology, 37, 913-924.
9. BEDARD, A. C., NICHOLS, S., BARBOSA, J. A., SCHACHAR, R., LOGAN, G. D., & TANNOCK, R. (2002). The development of selective inhibitory control across the life span. Developmental Neuropsychology, 21, 93-111.
10. BRAINERD, C. J. (2004). Dropping the other U: An alternative approach to U-shaped developmental functions. Journal of Cognition & Development, 5, 81-88.
11. BRAINERD, C. J., & REYNA, V. F. (1990). Inclusion illusions: Fuzzytrace theory and perceptual salience effects in cognitive development. Developmental Review, 10, 365-403.
12. BRAINERD, C. J., & REYNA, V. F. (1992). Explaining "memory free" reasoning. Psychological Science, 3, 332-339.
13. BRAINERD, C. J., & REYNA, V. F. (1993). Memory independence and memory interference in cognitive development. Psychological Review, 100, 42-67.
14. BRAINERD, C. J., & REYNA, V. F. (2001). Fuzzy-trace theory: Dual processes in memory, reasoning, and cognitive neuroscience. Advances in Child Development & Behavior, 28, 41-100.
15. BRAINERD, C. J., REYNA, V. F., & KNEER, R. (1995). False-recognition reversal: When similarity is distinctive. Journal of Memory & Language, 34, 157-185.
16. BRECHER, T. (2005). Application of the intuitive rule: "More A - more B " in probability task. A reaction time study. Unpublished master's thesis, Tel Aviv University, Israel (in Hebrew).
17. BRUNER, J. S. (1966). On the conservation of liquids. In J. S. Bruner, R. R. Olver, & P. M. Greenfield (Eds.), Studies in cognitive growth (pp. 183-207). New York: Wiley.
18. BRYANT, P. ( 1974). Perception and understanding in young children: An experimental approach. London: Methuen.
19. CARRAHER, T. N., CARRAHER, D. W., & SCHLIEMANN, A. D. (1985). Mathematics in the streets and in schools. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 3, 21-29.
20. CASHON, C. H., & COHEN, L. B. (2004). Beyond U-shaped development in infants' processing of faces: An information-processing account. Cognition & Development, 5, 59-80.
21. CAVE, K. R., & WOLFE, J. M. (1990). Modeling the role of parallel processing in visual search. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 225-271.
22. CECI, S. J., & LIKER, J. K. (1986). A day at the races: A study of IQ, expertise, and cognitive complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 255-266.
23. CHAMPAGNE, A. B., KLOPFER, L. E., & ANDERSON, J. H. ( 1979). Factors influencing the learning of classical mechanics. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Center.
24. CLEEREMANS, A., & JIMÉNEZ, L. (2002). Implicit learning and consciousness: A graded, dynamic perspective. In R. M. French & A. Cleeremans (Eds.), Implicit learning and consciousness: An empirical, philosophical and computational consensus in the making (pp. 1-40). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
25. CLEMENT, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students' preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 1241-1257.
26. CROWLEY, K., & SIEGLER, R. S. (1999). Explanation and generalization in young children's strategy learning. Child Development, 70, 304-316.
27. DAVIDSON, D. (1995). The representativeness heuristic and the conjunctive fallacy in children's decision making. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 41, 328-346.
28. DEGLIN, V. L., & KINSBOURNE, M. (1996). Divergent thinking styles of the hemispheres: How syllogisms are solved during transitory hemisphere suppression. Brain &. Cognition, 31, 285-307.
29. DEMBO, Y., LEVIN, I., & SIEGLER, R. S. (1997). A comparison of the geometric reasoning of students attending Israeli ultraothodox and mainstream schools. Developmental Psychology, 33, 92-103.
30. DIAMOND, A., KIRKHAM, N., & AMSO, D. (2002). Conditions under which young children can hold two rules in mind and inhibit a prepotent response. Developmental Psychology, 38, 352-362.
31. DIXON, J. A., & DOHN, M. C. (2003). Redescription disembeds relations: Evidence from relational transfer and use in problem solving. Memory & Cognition, 31, 1082-1093.
32. DIXON, J. A., & MOORE, C. F. (1996). The developmental role of intuitive principles in choosing mathematical strategies. Developmental Psychology, 32, 241-253.
33. DIXON, J. A., & MOORE, C. F. (1997). Characterizing the intuitive representation in problem solving: Evidence from evaluating mathematical strategies. Memory & Cognition, 25, 395-412.
34. DOSHER, B. A. (1984). Discriminating preexperimental (semantic) from learned (episodic) associations: A speed - accuracy study. Cognitive Psychology, 16, 519-555.
35. DOSHER, B. A., & ROSEDALE, G. (1991). Judgments of semantic and episodic relatedness: Common time-course and failure of segregation. Journal of Memory & Language, 30, 125-160.
36. EVANS, J. S. B. T., & OVER, D. E. (1996). Rationality and reasoning. Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
37. EVANS, J. S. B. T., & OVER, D. E. (2004). If. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
38. FALK, R., FALK, R., & LEVIN, I. (1980). A potential for learning probability in young children. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 11, 181-204.
39. FISCHBEIN, E. (1987). Intuition in science and mathematics: An educational approach. Dordrecht: Reidel.
40. FISCHBEIN, E., & SCHNARCH, D. (1997). The evolution with age of probabilistic, intuitively based misconceptions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 96-105.
41. FREUD, S. (1953). The interpretation of dreams. In J. Strachey (Ed. & Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vols. 4 and 5). London: Hogarth. (Original work published 1900)
42. GILINSKY, A. S., & JUDD, B. B. (1994). Working memory and bias in reasoning across the life span. Psychology & Aging, 9, 356-371.
43. GREEN, D. R. (1983). A survey of probability concepts in 3000 pupils aged 11-16 years. In D. R. Grey, P. Holmes, V Barnett, & G. M. Constable (Eds.), Proceedings of the First International Conference on Teaching Statistics (pp. 766-783). Sheffield, U.K.: Teaching Statistics Trust.
44. GREENBERG, J. H. (1966). Language universals. The Hague: Mouton.
45. GUNSTONE, R. F., & WHITE, R. T. (1981). Understanding of gravity. Science Education, 65, 291-299.
46. HANDLEY, S. J., CAPON, A., BEVERIDGE, M., DENNIS, I., & EVANS, J. S. B. T. (2004). Working memory, inhibitory control and the development of children's reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 10, 175-195.
47. JAMES, W. (1950). The principles of psychology. New York: Dover. (Original work published 1890)
48. KAIL, R., & SALTHOUSE, T. A. (1994). Processing speed as a mental capacity. Acta Psychologica, 86, 199-225.
49. KARMILOFF-SMITH, A. (1986). From meta-processes to conscious access: Evidence from children's metalinguistic and repair data. Cognition, 23, 95-147.
50. KARMILOFF-SMITH, A. (1992). Beyond modularity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
51. KARMILOFF-SMITH, A. (1994). Beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive science. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 17, 693-745.
52. KIM, M.-S., & CAVE, K. R. (1999). Top-down and bottom-up attentional control: On the nature of interference from a salient distractor. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 1009-1023.
53. KLACZYNSKI, P. A. (2001). Analytical and heuristic processing influences on adolescent reasoning and decision making. Child Development, 12, 844-861.
54. KLACZYNSKI, P. A., & ROBINSON, B. (2000). Personal theories, intellectual ability, and epistemological beliefs: Adult age differences in everyday reasoning biases. Psychology & Aging, 15, 400-416.
55. KOKIS, J. V., MACPHERSON, R., TOPLAK, M. E., WEST, R. F., & STANOVICH, K. E. (2002). Heuristic and analytic processing: Age trends and associations with cognitive ability and cognitive styles. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 83, 26-52.
56. LAMY, D., LEBER, A., & EGETH, H. E. (2004). Effects of task relevance and stimulus-driven salience in feature-search mode. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 30, 1019-1031.
57. LIVNE, T. (1996). Examination of high school students' difficulties in understanding the change in surface area, volume and surface area/ volume ratio with the change in size and/or shape of a body. Unpublished master's thesis, Tel Aviv University, Israel.
58. LLERAS, A., & VON MÜHLENEN, A. (2004). Spatial context and top-down strategies in visual search. Spatial Vision, 17, 465-482.
59. MENDEL, N. (1998). The intuitive rule "same of A, same of B ": The case of comparison of rectangles. Unpublished master's thesis, Tel Aviv University, Israel (in Hebrew).
60. MOSHMAN, D. (2004). From inference to reasoning: The construction of rationality. Thinking & Reasoning, 10, 221-239.
61. NAPOLITANO, A. C., & SLOUTSKY, V. M. (2004). Is a picture worth a thousand words? The flexible nature of modality dominance in young children. Child Development, 75, 1850-1870.
62. OSMAN, M. (2004). An evaluation of dual-process theories of reasoning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 11, 988-1010.
63. PLACET, J., & INHELDER, B. (1974). The construction of quantity. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
64. PIAGET, J., INHELDER, B., & SZEMINSKA, A. (1960). The child's conception of geometry. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
65. PRATTO, F., & JOHN, O. P. (1991). Automatic vigilance: The attentiongrabbing power of negative social information. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 61, 380-391.
66. REINGOLD, E. M., & STAMPE, D. M. (2004). Saccadic inhibition in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 30, 194-211.
67. REYNA, V. F. (1996). Conceptions of memory development, with implications for reasoning and decision making. Annals of Child Development, 12, 87-118.
68. REYNA, V. F., & BRAINERD, C. J. (1995). Fuzzy-trace theory: An interim synthesis. Learning & Individual Differences, 7, 1-75.
69. REYNA, V. F., & ELLIS, S. C. (1994). Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in children's risky decision making. Psychological Science, 5, 275-279.
70. ROTHERMUND, K., & WENTURA, D. (2004). Underlying processes in the implicit association test: Dissociating salience from associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 139-165.
71. SEAMAN, J. G., LUO, C. R., SCHWARTZ, M. A., JONES, K. J., LEE, D. M., & JONES, S. J. (2002). Reception can have similar or different effects on accurate and false recognition. Journal of Memory & Language, 46, 323-340.
72. SHERRY, D. F., & SCHACTER, D. L. (1987). The evolution of multiple memory systems. Psychological Review, 94, 439-454.
73. SIEGLER, R. S. (1976). Three aspects of cognitive development. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 481-520.
74. SIEGLER, R. S. (1999). Strategic development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 430-435.
75. SIEGLER, R. S. (2004). Learning about learning. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 50, 353-368.
76. SIEGLER, R. S., & JENKINS, E. (1989). How children discover new strategies. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
77. SIEGLER, R. S., & STERN, E. (1998). Conscious and unconscious strategy discoveries: A microgenetic analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 377-397.
78. SLOMAN, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 3-22.
79. SLOMAN, S. A. (2002). Two systems of reasoning. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 379-398). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
80. SLOUTSKY, V. M., & FISHER, A. V. (2004). When development and learning decrease memory: Evidence against category-based induction in children. Psychological Science, 15, 553-558.
81. SOBEL, K. V., & CAVE, K. R. (2002). Roles of salience and strategy in conjunction search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 28, 1055-1070.
82. STANOVICH, K. E. (1999). Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
83. STANOVICH, K. E. (2004). The robot's rebellion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
84. STANOVICH, K. E., & WEST, R. F. (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 22, 645-665.
85. STAVY, R. (1981). Teaching the inverse function via the concentration of salt water solution. Archives de Psychologie, 49, 267-287.
86. STAVY, R.(1991).Using analogy to overcome misconceptions of conservation of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 305-313.
87. STAVY, R. (2006). Informational conflict in proportional reasoning. Manuscript in preparation.
88. STAVY, R., & BERKOVITZ, B. (1980). Cognitive conflict as a basis for teaching quantitative aspects of the concept of temperature. Science Education, 64, 679-692.
89. STAVY, R., GOEL, V., CRITCHLEY, H., & DOLAN, R. (2006). Intuitive interference in quantitative reasoning. Brain Research, 1073-1074, 383-388.
90. STAVY, R., & STACHEL, D. (1985). Children's conception of changes in the state of matter: From solid to liquid. Archives de Psychologie, 53, 331-344.
91. STAVY, R., & TIROSH, D. (1993). When analogy is perceived as such. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 1229-1239.
92. STAVY, R., & TIROSH, D. (1996). Intuitive rules in science and mathematics: The case of "more of A more of B." International Journal of Science Education, 18, 653-667.
93. STAVY, R., &TIROSH, D. (2000). How students (mis-)understand science and mathematics: Intuitive rules. New York: Teachers College Press.
94. STRAUSS, S., & STAVY, R. (1982). U-shaped behavioural growth: Implications for theories of development. In W. W. Hartup (Ed.), Review of child development research (Vol. 6, pp. 547-599). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
95. STRAUSS, S., STAVY, R., ORPAZ, N., &CARMI, G. G. (1982). U-shaped behavioral growth in ratio comparisons, or That's funny I would not have thought you were U-ish. In S. Strauss & R. Stavy (Eds.), U-shaped behavioral growth (pp. 11-36). New York: Academic Press.
96. TIROSH, D., & STAVY, R. (1996). Intuitive rules in science and mathematics: The case of "everything can be divided by two." International Journal of Science Education, 18, 669-683.
97. TIROSH, D., & STAVY, R. (1999). Intuitive rules: A way to explain and predict students' reasoning. Education Studies in Mathematics, 38, 51-66.
98. TIROSH, D., & TSAMIR, P. (1996). The role of representations in students' intuitive thinking about infinity. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science & Technology, 27, 33-40.
99. TREISMAN, A. (1998). Feature binding, attention and object perception. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B, 353, 1295-1306.
100. TSAMIR, P., TIROSH, D., & STAVY, R. (1998). Do equilateral polygons have equal angles? In A. Olivier & K. Newstead (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 137-144). Stellenbosch, South Africa.
101. TVERSKY, A., & KAHNEMAN, D. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430-454.
102. WENTURA, D. (2000). Dissociative affective and associative priming effects in the lexical decision task: Yes versus no responses to word targets reveal evaluative judgment tendencies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 456-469.
103. WENTURA, D., ROTHERMUND, K., & BAK, P. (2000). Automatic vigilance: The attention-grabbing power of approach- and avoidance-related social information. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 78, 1024-1037.
104. WINER, G. A., CRAIG, R. K., & WEINBAUM, E. (1992). Adults' failure on misleading weight-conservation tests: A developmental analysis. Developmental Psychology, 28, 109-120.
105. WINER, G. A., & MCGLONE, C. (1993). On the uncertainty of conservation: Responses to misleading conservation questions. Developmental Psychology, 29, 760-769.
106. WOLFE, J. M. (2001). Asymmetries in visual search: An introduction. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 381-389.
107. WOLFE, J. M. (2003). Moving towards solutions to some enduring controversies in visual search. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 70-76.
108. WOLFE, J. M., CAVE, K. R., & FRANZEL, S. L. (1989). Guided search: An alternative to the feature integration model of visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 15, 419-433.
109. YAIR, Y., & YAIR, Y. (2004). "Everything comes to an end": An intuitive rule in physics and mathematics. Science Education, 88, 594-609.
110. ZAZKIS, R. (1999). Intuitive rules in number theory: Example of "the more of A, the more of B" rule implementation. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40, 197-209.
111. ZAZKIS, R., & CAMPBELL, S. (1996a). Divisibility and multiplicative structure of natural numbers: Preservice teachers' understanding. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 540-563.
112. ZAZKIS, R., & CAMPBELL, S. (1996b). Prime decomposition: Understanding uniqueness. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15, 207-218.
113. ZIETSMAN, A., & CLEMENT, J. (1997). The role of extreme case reasoning in instruction for conceptual change. Journal of Learning Sciences, 6, 61-89.
114. ZINK, C. F., PAGNONI, G., MARTIN-SKURSKI, M. E., CHAPPELOW, J. C., & BERNS, G. S. (2004). Human striatal responses to monetary reward depend on saliency. Neuron, 42, 509-517.