Conceptual structure and the procedural affordances of rational numbers: Relational reasoning with fractions and decimals

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Volumn 144, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 127-150

  DeWolf, Melissa ^a   Bassok, Miriam ^b   Holyoak, Keith J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Analogy; Concepts; Mathematical reasoning; Rational numbers; Relations

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPREHENSION; CONCEPT FORMATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MATHEMATICS; PROBLEM SOLVING; PSYCHOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STUDENT; THEORETICAL MODEL; YOUNG ADULT;

COMPREHENSION; CONCEPT FORMATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MATHEMATICS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PROBLEM SOLVING; STUDENTS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84925481562     PISSN: 00963445     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/xge0000034     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Ball, D., & Wilson, S. M. (1996). Integrity in teaching: Recognizing the fusion of the moral and intellectual. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 155-192. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312033001155
2. Barbey, A. K., & Sloman, S. A. (2007). Base-rate respect: From ecological rationality to dual processes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30, 241-254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X07001653
3. Bassok, M., Chase, V. M., & Martin, S. A. (1998). Adding apples and oranges: Alignment of semantic and formal knowledge. Cognitive Psychology, 35, 99-134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1998.0675
4. Bassok, M., & Holyoak, K. J. (1989). Interdomain transfer between isomorphic topics in algebra and physics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 153-166.
5. Bassok, M., & Olseth, K. L. (1995). Object-based representations: Transfer between cases of continuous and discrete models of change. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1522-1538.
6. Bassok, M., Pedigo, S. F., & Oskarsson, A. T. (2008). Priming addition facts with semantic relations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 343-352. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.34.2.343
7. Bonato, M., Fabbri, S., Umilta', C., & Zorzi, M. (2007). The mental representation of numerical fractions: Real or integer? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1410-1419. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.33.6.1410
8. Boyer, T. W., Levine, S. C., & Huttenlocher, J. (2008). Development of proportional reasoning: Where young children go wrong. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1478-1490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0013110
9. Braithwaite, D. W., & Goldstone, R. L. (2013). Integrating formal and grounded representations in combinatorics learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 666-682. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0032095
10. Cantlon, J. F., Brannon, E. M., Carter, E. J., & Pelphrey, K. A. (2006). Functional imaging of numerical processing in adults and 4-y-old children. PLoS Biology, 4, e125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040125
11. Cedrus Corp., Superlab 4.0. (2004). [Computer software]. San Pedro, CA: Cedrus Corp.
12. Chen, D., Lu, H., & Holyoak, K. J. (2014). The discovery and comparison of symbolic magnitudes. Cognitive Psychology, 71, 27-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2014.01.002
13. Clearfield, M. W., & Mix, K. S. (2001). Amount Versus Number: Infants' Use of Area and Contour Length to Discriminate Small Sets. Journal of Cognition and Development, 2, 243-260. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327647JCD0203_1
14. Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2014). http://www.corestandards.org/Math/Content/4/NF/(retrieved September 23, 2014).
15. Cordes, S., & Gelman, R. (2005). The young numerical mind: What does it count? In J. Campbell (Ed.), Handbook of mathematical cognition (pp. 128-142). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
16. Dehaene, S. (1997). The number sense. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
17. Dehaene, S., & Changeux, J.-P. (1993). Development of elementary numerical abilities: A neuronal model. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 390-407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/jocn.1993.5.4.390
18. DeWolf, M., Grounds, M. A., Bassok, M., & Holyoak, K. J. (2014). Magnitude comparison with different types of rational numbers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40, 71-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0032916
19. English, L. D., & Halford, G. S. (1995). Mathematics education: Models and processes. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Feigenson, L., Carey, S., & Spelke, E. (2002). Infants' discrimination of number vs. continuous extent. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 33-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/cogp.2001.0760
21. Feigenson, L., Dehaene, S., & Spelke, E. (2004). Core systems of number. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 307-314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.05.002
22. Gelman, R. (1993). A rational-constructivist account of early learning about numbers and objects. In D. L. Medin (Ed.), Learning and motivation (Vol. 30, pp. 61-96). New York, NY: Academic Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60294-7
23. Gigerenzer, G., & Hoffrage, U. (1995). How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats. Psychological Review, 102, 684-704. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.4.684
24. Gonzales, P., Williams, T., Jocelyn, L., Roey, S., Kastberg, D., & Brenwald, S. (2008). Highlights from TIMSS 2007: Mathematics and science achievement of U.S. fourth- and eighth-grade students in an international context (NCES 2009-001). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.
25. Goswami, U. (1989). Relational complexity and the development of analogical reasoning. Cognitive Development, 96, 229-241.
26. Gray, E. M., & Tall, D. O. (1994). Duality, ambiguity and flexibility: A proceptual view of simple arithmetic. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26, 115-141.
27. Halberda, J., & Feigenson, L. (2008). Developmental change in the acuity of the "number sense": The approximate number system in 3-, 4-, 5-, and 6-year-olds and adults. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1457-1465. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0012682
28. Halford, G. S., Wilson, W. H., & Phillips, S. (1998). Processing capacity defined by relational complexity: Implications for comparative, developmental, and cognitive psychology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 803-831. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X98001769
29. Halford, G. S., Wilson, W. H., & Phillips, S. (2010). Relational knowledge: The foundation of higher cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14, 497-505. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2010.08.005
30. Hinsley, D., Hayes, J. R., & Simon, H. A. (1977). From words to equations: Meaning and representation in algebra word problems. In P. A. Carpenter & M. A. Just (Eds.), Cognitive processes in comprehension (pp. 89-106). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
31. Hoffrage, U., Gigerenzer, G., Krauss, S., & Martignon, L. (2002). Representation facilitates reasoning: What natural frequencies are and what they are not. Cognition, 84, 343-352. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00050-1
32. Iuculano, T., & Butterworth, B. (2011). Understanding the real value of fractions and decimals. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 64, 2088-2098. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2011.604785
33. Jacob, S. N., Vallentin, D., & Nieder, A. (2012). Relating magnitudes: The brain's code for proportions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16, 157-166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.02.002
34. Kallai, A. Y., & Tzelgov, J. (2009). A generalized fraction: An entity smaller than one on the mental number line. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 1845-1864. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0016892
35. Kieren, T. E. (1976). On the mathematical, cognitive, and instructional foundations of rational number. In R. Lesh (Ed.), Number and measurement: Papers from a research workshop (pp. 101-144). Columbus, OH: ERIC/SMEAC.
36. Kintsch, W., & Greeno, J. G. (1985). Understanding and solving word arithmetic problems. Psychological Review, 92, 109-129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.92.1.109
37. Landy, D., Brookes, D., & Smout, R. (2014). Abstract numeric relations and the visual structure of algebra. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 1404-1418. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0036823
38. Landy, D., & Goldstone, R. L. (2007). How abstract is symbolic thought? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 720-733. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.720
39. Mack, N. K. (1993). Learning rational numbers with understanding: The case of informal knowledge. In T. P. Carpenter, E. Fennema, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Rational numbers: An integration of research (pp. 85-105). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
40. Mack, N. K. (1995). Confounding whole-number and fraction concepts when building on informal knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26, 422-441. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/749431
41. Mix, K. S., Levine, S. C., & Huttenlocher, J. (1999). Early fraction calculation ability. Developmental Psychology, 35, 164-174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.35.1.164
42. Mochon, D., & Sloman, S. A. (2004). Causal models frame interpretation of mathematical equations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 1099-1104. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03196743
43. Moss, J., & Case, R. (1999). Developing children's understanding of the rational numbers: A new model and an experimental curriculum. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 122-147. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/749607
44. Moyer, R. S., & Landauer, T. K. (1967). Time required for judgments of numerical inequality. Nature, 215, 1519-1520.
45. Ni, Y., & Zhou, Y. D. (2005). Teaching and learning fraction and rational numbers: The origins and implications of the whole number bias. Educational Psychologist, 40, 27-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4001_3
46. Nieder, A., & Dehaene, S. (2009). Representation of number in the brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 32, 185-208. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.051508.135550
47. Nunes, T., Light, P., & Mason, J. (1993). Tools for thought: The measurement of length and area. Learning and Instruction, 3, 39-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(09)80004-2
48. Over, D. E. (2007). Content-independent conditional inference. In M. J. Roberts (Ed.), Domain general versus domain specific processes in higher cognition (pp. 83-103). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
49. Pinel, P., Piazza, M., Le Bihan, D., & Dehaene, S. (2004). Distributed and overlapping cerebral representations of number, size, and luminance during comparative judgments. Neuron, 41, 983-993. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(04)00107-2
50. Rapp, M., Bassok, M., DeWolf, M., & Holyoak, K. J. (in press). Modeling discrete and continuous entities with fractions and decimals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied.
51. Richland, L. E., Stigler, J. W., & Holyoak, K. J. (2012). Teaching the conceptual structure of mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 47, 189-203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.667065
52. Rittle-Johnson, B., Siegler, R. S., & Alibali, M. W. (2001). Developing conceptual understanding and procedural skill in mathematics: An iterative process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 346-362. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.2.346
53. Rittle-Johnson, B., & Star, J. R. (2007). Does comparing solution methods facilitate conceptual and procedural knowledge? An experimental study on learning to solve equations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 561-574. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.561
54. Schneider, M., & Siegler, R. S. (2010). Representations of the magnitudes of fractions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 1227-1238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0018170
55. Sfard, A., & Linchevski, L. (1994). The gains and the pitfalls of reification: The case of algebra. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26, 191-228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01273663
56. Siegler, R. S., Duncan, G. J., Davis-Kean, P. E., Duckworth, K., Claessens, A., Engel, M.,.. Chen, M. (2012). Early predictors of high school mathematics achievement. Psychological Science, 23, 691-697. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797612440101
57. Siegler, R. S., Fazio, L. K., Bailey, D. H., & Zhou, X. (2013). Fractions: The new frontier for theories of numerical development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17, 13-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.11.004
58. Siegler, R. S., Thompson, C. A., & Schneider, M. (2011). An integrated theory of whole number and fractions development. Cognitive Psychology, 62, 273-296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2011.03.001
59. Sophian, C. (2000). Perceptions of proportionality in young children: Matching spatial ratios. Cognition, 75, 145-170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00062-7
60. Sophian, C. (2007). The origins of mathematical knowledge. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
61. Stigler, J. W., Givvin, K. B., & Thompson, B. (2010). What community college developmental mathematics students understand about mathematics. The MathAMATYC Educator, 10, 4-16.
62. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: Free Press.
63. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983). Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review, 90, 293-315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.90.4.293
64. Vamvakoussi, X., & Vosniadou, S. (2004). Understanding the structure of the set of rational numbers: A conceptual change approach. Learning and Instruction, 14, 453-467. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.013
65. Zahner, D.,&Corter, J. E. (2010). The process of probability problem solving: Use of external visual representations. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 12, 177-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10986061003654240
66. Zhang, J., & Norman, D. A. (1995). A representational analysis of numeration systems. Cognition, 57, 271-295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(95)00674-3