Following the standard form: Effects of equation format on algebraic modeling

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 502-515

  Fisher, Kristie J ^a   Borchert, Katja ^a   Bassok, Miriam ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Algebra; External representation; Format; Mathematical reasoning

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; CONCEPT FORMATION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PROBLEM SOLVING; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; STUDENT; THEORETICAL MODEL;

COMPREHENSION; CONCEPT FORMATION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PROBLEM SOLVING; STUDENTS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79960070459     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: 15325946     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13421-010-0031-6     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Baroody, A. J., & Ginsberg, H. P. (1983). The effects of instruction on children's understanding of the "equals" sign. The Elementary School Journal, 84, 198-212.
2. Bassok, M., Chase, V., & Martin, S. A. (1998). Adding apples and oranges: Alignment of semantic and formal knowledge. Cognitive Psychology, 35, 99-134. doi:10.1006/cogp.1998.0675.
3. Bassok, M., Wu, L. L., & Olseth, K. L. (1995). Judging a book by its cover: Interpretative effects of content on problem-solving transfer. Memory & Cognition, 23, 354-367.
4. Bernardo, A., & Okagaki, L. (1994). Roles of symbolic knowledge and problem-information context in solving word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 212-220. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.86.2.212.
5. Blessing, S. B., & Ross, B. H. (1996). Content effects in problem categorization and problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 792-810. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.22.3.792.
6. Borchert, K. (2003). Disassociation between arithmetic and algebraic knowledge in mathematical modeling. University of Washington: Unpublished Dissertation.
7. Clement, J. (1982). Algebra word problem solutions: Thought processes underlying a common misconception. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 13, 16-30.
8. Clement, J., Lochhead, J., & Monk, G. S. (1981). Translation difficulties in learning mathematics. The American Mathematical Monthly, 88, 286-290.
9. Clement, J., Lochhead, J., & Soloway, E. (1979). Translating between symbol systems: Isolating a common difficulty in solving algebra word problems. A cognitive development project, department of physics and astronomy. Amherst, Massachusetts: University of Massachusetts.
10. Cobb, P. (1987). An investigation of young children's academic arithmetic contexts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 18, 109-124.
11. Cohen, E., & Kanim, S. E. (2005). Factors influencing the algebra "reversal error. American Journal of Physics, 73, 1072-1078.
12. Dixon, J. A. (2005). Mathematical problem solving: the roles of exemplar, schema, and relational representations. In J. I. D. Campbell (Ed.), Handbook of mathematical cognition (pp. 379-395). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
13. Dixon, J. A., Deets, J. K., & Bangert, A. (2001). The representations of the arithmetic operations include functional relationships. Memory & Cognition, 29, 462-477.
14. Fisher, K. M. (1988). The students-and-professors problem revisited. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 19, 260-262.
15. Goldstone, R. L., & Barsalou, L. W. (1998). Reuniting perception and conception. Cognition, 65, 231-262. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277 (97)00047-4.
16. Graf, E. A., Bassok, M., Hunt, E., & Minstrell, J. (2004). A computer-based tutorial for algebraic representation: The effects of scaffolding on performance during the tutorial and on a transfer task. Technology Instruction Cognition and Learning, 2, 135-170.
17. Herscovics, N. (1989). Cognitive obstacles encountered in the learning of algebra. In S. Wagner & C. Kieran (Eds.), Research issues in the learning and teaching of algebra (pp. 60-86). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Herscovics, N., & Linchevski, L. (1994). A cognitive gap between arithmetic and algebra. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 27, 59-78. doi:10.1007/BF01284528.
19. Hinsley, D. A., Hayes, J. R., & Simon, H. A. (1977). From words to equations: Meaning and representation in algebra word problems. In M. A. Just & P. A. Carpenter (Eds.), Cognitive processes in comprehension (pp. 89-106). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Kaput, J., & Sims-Knight, J. E. (1983). Errors in translations to algebraic equations: Roots and implications. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 5, 63-78.
21. Kieran, C. (1990). Cognitive processes involved in learning school algebra. In P. Nesher, J. Kilpatrick, et al. (Eds.), Mathematics and cognition: A research synthesis by the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (pp. 97-136). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
22. Kieran, C. (1992). The learning and teaching of school algebra. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 390-419). New York: Macmillan.
23. Knuth, E. J., Alibali, M.W., McNeil, N.M., Weinberg, A., & Stevens, A. C. (2005). Middle school students' understanding of core algebraic concepts: Equivalence & variable. International Journal on Mathematics Education, 37, 68-76. doi:10.1007/BF02655899.
24. Koedinger, K. R., Alibali, M. W., & Nathan, M. J. (2008). Trade-offs between grounded and abstract representations: Evidence from algebra problem solving. Cognitive Science, 32, 366-397. doi:10.1080/03640210701863933.
25. Kuchemann, D. (1981). Algebra. In K. Hart (Ed.), Children's understanding of mathematics: 11-16 (pp. 102-119). London: Murray.
26. Landy, D., & Goldstone, R. L. (2007). How abstract is symbolic thought? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 33, 720-733. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.720.
27. Larson, R. E., Kanold, T. D., & Stiff, L. (1993). Algebra 1. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath and Company.
28. Lochhead, J., & Mestre, J. P. (1988). From words to algebra: Mending misconceptions. In A. Cosford & A. Schulte (Eds.), The idea of algebra k-12: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Yearbook (pp. 127-136). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
29. MacGregor, M. E., & Stacey, K. (1993). Cognitive models underlying students' formulation of simple linear equations. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24, 217-232. doi:10.2307/749345.
30. Martin, S. A., & Bassok, M. (2005). Effects of semantic cues on mathematical modeling: Evidence from word-problem solving and equation construction tasks. Memory & Cognition, 33, 471-478.
31. Mayer, R. E., & Hegarty, M. (1996). The process of understanding mathematical problems. In R. J. Sternberg et al. (Eds.), The nature of mathematical thinking: The studies in mathematical thinking and learning series (pp. 29-53). Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.
32. McNeil, N. M., & Alibali, M. W. (2000). Learning mathematics from procedural instruction: Externally imposed goals influence what is learned. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 734-744. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.92.4.734.
33. McNeil, N. M., & Alibali, M. W. (2005). Knowledge change as a function of mathematics experience: All contexts are not created equal. Journal of Cognition and Development, 6, 285-306. doi:10.1207/s15327647jcd0602_6.
34. Mochon, D., & Sloman, S. A. (2004). Causal models frame interpretations of mathematical equations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 1099-1104.
35. Novick, L. R. (1988). Analogical transfer, problem similarity, and expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 510-520. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.14.3.510.
36. Novick, L. R., & Catley, K. M. (2007). Understanding phylogenies in biology: The influence of a Gestalt perceptual principle. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 13, 197-223. doi:10.1037/1076-898X.13.4.197.
37. Rosnick, P. (1981). Some misconceptions concerning the concept of variable. Mathematics Teacher, 74, 418-420.
38. Rosnick, P., & Clement, J. (1980). Learning without understanding: The effect of tutoring strategies on algebra misconceptions. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 3, 3-27.
39. Rubenstein, R. N., Craine, T. V., Butts, T. R., Cantrell, K., Dritsas, L., Elswick, V. A., et al. (2002). Integrated mathematics 1, teacher's edition. McDougal Littell: Evanston, IL.
40. Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 1-36. doi:10.1007/BF00302715.
41. Sherin, B. L. (2001). How students understand physics equations. Cognition and Instruction, 19, 479-541. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI1904_3.
42. Smith, J. E. K. (1976). Data transformations in analysis of variance. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 339-346. doi:10.1016/0022-5371(76)90030-X.
43. Stacey, K., & MacGregor, M. (1999). Learning the algebraic method of solving problems. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 18, 149-167. doi:10.1016/S0732-3123(99)00026-7.
44. Waldmann, M. R. (2007). Combining versus analyzing multiple causes: How domain assumptions and task context affect integration rules. Cognitive Science, 31, 233-256.
45. Wollman, W. (1983). Determining the sources of error in a translation from sentence to equation. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14, 169-181.