The use of heuristics in intuitive mathematical judgment

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 15, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 1174-1178

  Reber, Rolf ^a   Brun, Morten ^a   Mitterndorfer, Karoline ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; HUMAN; INTUITION; MATHEMATICS; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PROBLEM SOLVING; REACTION TIME;

CUES; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; HUMANS; INTUITION; MATHEMATICS; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PROBLEM SOLVING; REACTION TIME;

EID: 59049091059     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/PBR.15.6.1174     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2006). Predicting short-term stock fluctuations by using processing fluency. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103, 9369-9372.
2. Ben-Zeev, T. (1996). When erroneous mathematical thinking is just as "correct": The oxymoron of rational errors. In R. J. Sternberg & T. Ben-Zeev (Eds.), The nature of mathematical thinking (pp. 55-79). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Bolte, A., & Goschke, T. (2005). On the speed of intuition: Intuitive judgments of semantic coherence under different response deadlines. Memory & Cognition, 33, 1248-1255.
4. Bowers, K. S., Regehr, G., Balthazard, C., & Parker, K. (1990). Intuition in the context of discovery. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 72-110.
5. Campbell, J. I. D. (ed.) (2005). Handbook of mathematical cognition. New York: Psychology Press.
6. Campbell, J. I. D., & Austin, S. (2003). Effects of response time deadlines on adults' strategy choices for simple addition. Memory & Cognition, 30, 988-994.
7. Chandrasekhar, S. (1987). Truth and beauty: Aesthetics and motivations in science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
8. Cole, K. C. (1998). The universe in a teacup: The mathematics of truth and beauty. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
9. Dehaene, S. (1997). The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. New York: Oxford University Press.
10. Draine, S. C., & Greenwald, A. G. (1998). Replicable unconscious semantic priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 286-303.
11. Gangestad, S. W., Thornhill, R., & Yeo, R. A. (1994). Facial attractiveness, developmental stability, and fluctuating asymmetry. Ethology & Sociobiology, 15, 73-85.
12. Garner, W. R. (1974). The processing of information and structure. Potomac, MD: Erlbaum.
13. Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. (eds.) (2002). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Greenwald, A. G., Draine, S. C., & Abrams, R. L. (1996). Three cognitive markers of unconscious semantic activation. Science, 273, 1699-1702.
15. Hadamard, J. (1954). The psychology of invention in the mathematical field. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16. Jacoby, L. L., & Dallas, M. (1981). On the relationship between autobiographical memory and perceptual learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 110, 306-340.
17. Kalick, S. M., Zebrowitz, L. A., Langlois, J. H., & Johnson, R. M. (1998). Does human facial attractiveness honestly advertise health? Longitudinal data on an evolutionary question. Psychological Science, 9, 8-13.
18. Lee, A. Y., & Labroo, A. A. (2004). The effect of conceptual and perceptual fluency on brand evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 41, 151-165.
19. McColm, G. (2007). A metaphor for mathematics education. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 54, 499-502.
20. McGlone, M. S., & Tofighbakhsh, J. (2000). Birds of a feather flock conjointly (?): Rhyme as reason in aphorisms. Psychological Science, 11, 424-428.
21. Palmer, S. E. (1991). Goodness, Gestalt, groups, and Garner: Local symmetry subgroups as a theory of figural goodness. In G. R. Lockhead & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.), The perception of structure (pp. 23-39). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
22. Parks, C. M., & Toth, J. P. (2006). Fluency, familiarity, aging, and the illusion of truth. Aging, Neuropsychology, & Cognition, 13, 225-253.
23. Posner, M. I., & Keele, S. W. (1968). On the genesis of abstract ideas. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 77, 353-363.
24. Reber, A. S. (1967). Implicit learning of artificial grammars. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 6, 855-863.
25. Reber, R. (2002). Reasons for the preference for symmetry. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 25, 415-416.
26. Reber, R., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Effects of perceptual fluency on judgments of truth. Consciousness & Cognition, 8, 338-342.
27. Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver's processing experience? Personality & Social Psychology Review, 8, 364-382.
28. Reber, R., Winkielman, P., & Schwarz, N. (1998). Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychological Science, 9, 45-48.
29. Rhodes, G., Proffitt, F., Grady, J. M., & Sumich, A. (1998). Facial symmetry and the perception of beauty. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 659-669.
30. Royer, F. (1981). Detection of symmetry. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 7, 1186-1210.
31. Silver, E. A. (1986). Using conceptual and procedural knowledge: A focus on relationships. In J. Hiebert (Ed.), Conceptual and procedural knowledge (pp. 181-198). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. Stewart, I. (2007). Why beauty is truth: The history of symmetry. New York: Basic Books.
33. Topolinski, S., & Strack, F. (in press). The analysis of intuition: Processing fluency and affect in judgments of semantic coherence. Cognition & Emotion.
34. Unkelbach, C. (2007). Reversing the truth effect: Learning the interpretation of processing fluency in judgments of truth. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 33, 219-230.
35. VanLehn, K. (1986). Arithmetic procedures are induced from examples. In J. Hiebert (Ed.), Conceptual and procedural knowledge (pp. 133-179). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. Whittlesea, B. W. A. (1993). Illusions of familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 19, 1235-1253.
37. Winkielman, P., Halberstadt, J., Fazendeiro, T., & Catty, S. (2006). Prototypes are attractive because they are easy on the mind. Psychological Science, 17, 799-806.