How do students reason about statistical sampling with computer simulations? An integrative review from a grounded cognition perspective.
Dual-process theories
Grounded cognition
Perceptual learning
Statistical sampling
Statistics simulations
Journal
Cognitive research: principles and implications
ISSN: 2365-7464
Titre abrégé: Cogn Res Princ Implic
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101697632
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
31 May 2024
31 May 2024
Historique:
received:
19
10
2023
accepted:
11
05
2024
medline:
31
5
2024
pubmed:
31
5
2024
entrez:
30
5
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Interactive computer simulations are commonly used as pedagogical tools to support students' statistical reasoning. This paper examines whether and how these simulations enable their intended effects. We begin by contrasting two theoretical frameworks-dual processes and grounded cognition-in the context of people's conceptions about statistical sampling, setting the stage for the potential benefits of simulations in learning such conceptions. Then, we continue with reviewing the educational literature on statistical sampling simulations. Our review tentatively suggests benefits of the simulations for building statistical habits of mind. However, challenges seem to persist when more specific concepts and skills are investigated. With and without simulations, students have difficulty forming an aggregate view of data, interpreting sampling distributions, showing a process-based understanding of the law of large numbers, making statistical inferences, and context-independent reasoning. We propose that grounded cognition offers a framework for understanding these findings, highlighting the bidirectional relationship between perception and conception, perceptual design features, and guided perceptual routines for supporting students' meaning making from simulations. Finally, we propose testable instructional strategies for using simulations in statistics education.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38816630
doi: 10.1186/s41235-024-00561-x
pii: 10.1186/s41235-024-00561-x
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
33Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Abrahamson, D. (2014). Rethinking probability education: perceptual judgment as epistemic resource. In E. J. Chernoff & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Probabilistic thinking: Presenting plural perspectives (pp. 239–260). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7155-0_13
doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-7155-0_13
Abrahamson, D., Janusz, R. M., & Wilensky, U. (2006). There once was a 9-block…-A middle-school design for probability and statistics. Journal of Statistics Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/10691898.2006.11910573
doi: 10.1080/10691898.2006.11910573
Altemeier, L., Jones, J., Abbott, R. D., & Berninger, V. W. (2006). Executive functions in becoming writing readers and reading writers: Note taking and report writing in third and fifth graders. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29(1), 161–173. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326942dn2901_8
doi: 10.1207/s15326942dn2901_8
pubmed: 16390292
Arnold, P., Pfannkuch, M., Wild, C. J., Regan, M., & Budgett, S. (2017). Enhancing students’ inferential reasoning: from hands-on to “movies.” Journal of Statistics Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/10691898.2011.11889609
doi: 10.1080/10691898.2011.11889609
Bago, B., & De Neys, W. (2017). Fast logic? Examining the time course assumption of dual process theory. Cognition, 158, 90–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.10.014
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.10.014
pubmed: 27816844
Bakker, A. (2004). Reasoning about shape as a pattern in variability. Statistics Education Research Journal, 3(2), 64–83.
doi: 10.52041/serj.v3i2.552
Bargagliotti, A., Franklin, C., Arnold, P., Gould, R., Johnson, S., Perez, L., & Spangler, D. (2020). Pre-K12 Guidelines for Assessment and Instruction in Statistics Education (GAISE) report II. American Statistical Association and National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Bar-Hillel, M. (1980). What features make samples seem representative? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6(3), 578–589. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.6.3.578
doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.6.3.578
Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 617–645. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639
doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639
pubmed: 17705682
Batanero, C., Begue, N., Borovcnik, M., & Gea, M. M. (2020). Ways in which high-school students understand the sampling distribution for proportions. Statistics Education Research Journal, 19(3), 32–52. https://doi.org/10.52041/serj.v19i3.55
doi: 10.52041/serj.v19i3.55
Bauer, B. (2017). Perceptual averaging of line length: Effects of concurrent digit memory load. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79(8), 2510–2522. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-017-1388-4
doi: 10.3758/s13414-017-1388-4
Ben-Zvi, D., Aridor, K., Makar, K., & Bakker, A. (2012). Students’ emergent articulations of uncertainty while making informal statistical inferences. ZDM Mathematics Education, 44, 913–925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0420-3
doi: 10.1007/s11858-012-0420-3
Ben-Zvi, D., Bakker, A., & Makar, K. (2015). Learning to reason from samples. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 88(3), 291–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-015-9593-3
doi: 10.1007/s10649-015-9593-3
Brady, A. C., Grifn, M. M., Lewis, A. R., Fong, C. J., & Robinson, D. H. (2023). How scientific is educational psychology research? The increasing trend of squeezing causality and recommendations from non-intervention studies. Educational Psychology Review, 35, 37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09759-9
doi: 10.1007/s10648-023-09759-9
Braham, H. M., Ben-Zvi, D., & Aridor, K. (2013). Students’ reasoning about uncertainty while exploring sampling distributions in an “Integrated Approach”. In J. Garfield (Ed.), Proceedings of the international collaboration for research on statistical reasoning, thinking and learning, SRTL, 8 (pp. 18–33). University of Minnesota.
Brown, J. M. (2021). Student understanding of the hypothetical nature of simulations in introductory statistics (Publishing No. 28719020) [Doctoral Dissertation, University of Minnesota], ProQuest Dissertation Publishing.
Butler, A. C., Fazio, L. K., & Marsh, E. J. (2011). The hypercorrection effect persists over a week, but high-confidence errors return. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(6), 1238–1244. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0173-y
doi: 10.3758/s13423-011-0173-y
Carver, R. H. (2011). Introductory statistics unconstrained by computability: A new Cobb salad. Technology Innovations in Statistics Education. https://doi.org/10.5070/T551000043
doi: 10.5070/T551000043
Chance, B., del Mas, R., & Garfield, J. (2004). Reasoning about sampling distributions. In The challenge of developing statistical literacy, reasoning and thinking. Springer.
Chance, B., Wong, J., & Tintle, N. (2016). Student performance in curricula centered on simulation-based inference: A preliminary report. Journal of Statistics Education, 24(3), 114–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/10691898.2016.1223529
doi: 10.1080/10691898.2016.1223529
Chandrakantha, L. (2014). Excel simulation as a tool in teaching sampling distributions in introductory statistics. In K. Makar, B. de Sousa, & R. Gould (Eds.), Sustainability in statistics education. Proceedings of the ninth international conference on teaching statistics. International Statistical Institute.
Chandrakantha, L. (2018). Simulating sampling distribution of the mean in R. Electronic Journal of Mathematics & Technology, 12(2).
Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973). Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 4(1), 55–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90004-2
doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(73)90004-2
Chong, S. C., & Treisman, A. (2003). Representation of statistical properties. Vision Research, 43(4), 393–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(02)00596-5
doi: 10.1016/S0042-6989(02)00596-5
pubmed: 12535996
Chong, S. C., & Treisman, A. (2005). Statistical processing: Computing the average size in perceptual groups. Vision Research, 45(7), 891–900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2004.10.004
doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2004.10.004
pubmed: 15644229
Clark, A. (2017). Embodied, situated, and distributed cognition. In W. Bechtel & G. Graham (Eds.), A companion to cognitive science (pp. 506–517). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405164535.ch39
doi: 10.1002/9781405164535.ch39
Cobb, G. W. (2007). The introductory statistics course: A ptolemaic curriculum? Technology Innovations in Statistics Education. https://doi.org/10.5070/T511000028
doi: 10.5070/T511000028
Cobb, G. W., & Moore, D. S. (1997). Mathematics, statistics, and teaching. The American Mathematical Monthly, 104(9), 801–823. https://doi.org/10.1080/00029890.1997.11990723
doi: 10.1080/00029890.1997.11990723
Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1996). Are humans good intuitive statisticians after all? Rethinking some conclusions from the literature on judgment under uncertainty. Cognition, 58(1), 1–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(95)00664-8
doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(95)00664-8
Cui, L., & Liu, Z. (2021). Synergy between research on ensemble perception, data visualization, and statistics education: A tutorial review. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 83, 1290–1311. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-020-02212-x
doi: 10.3758/s13414-020-02212-x
Day, S. B., & Goldstone, R. L. (2011). Analogical transfer from a simulated physical system. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(3), 551. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022333
doi: 10.1037/a0022333
pubmed: 21299324
de Vetten, A., Schoonenboom, J., Keijzer, R., & van Oers, B. (2018). The development of informal statistical inference content knowledge of pre-service primary school teachers during a teacher college intervention. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 99(2), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-018-9823-6
doi: 10.1007/s10649-018-9823-6
diSessa, A. A. (2002). Why “conceptual ecology” is a good idea. In M. Limón & L. Mason (Eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice (pp. 28–60). Springer.
doi: 10.1007/0-306-47637-1_2
Elias, E., Dyer, M., & Sweeny, T. D. (2017). Ensemble perception of dynamic emotional groups. Psychological Science, 28(2), 193–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616678188
doi: 10.1177/0956797616678188
pubmed: 28036236
Eliason, K. L., & Jones, S. R. (2020). Students' “multi-sample distribution” misconception about sampling distributions. In A. I. Sacristán, J. C. Cortés-Zavala, & P. M. Ruiz-Arias (Eds.). Mathematics education across cultures: Proceedings of the 42nd meeting of the North American chapter of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (pp. 1322–1330). PME-NA. https://doi.org/10.51272/pmena.42.2020
Engel, J. (2017). Statistical literacy for active citizenship: a call for data science education. Statistics Education Research Journal, 16(1), 44–49. https://doi.org/10.52041/serj.v16i1.213
doi: 10.52041/serj.v16i1.213
English, L. D., & Watson, J. M. (2016). Development of probabilistic understanding in fourth grade. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 47(1), 28–62. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.47.1.0028
doi: 10.5951/jresematheduc.47.1.0028
Evans, J. S. B. (2003). In two minds: Dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(10), 454–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2003.08.012
doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2003.08.012
pubmed: 14550493
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 255–278. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629
doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629
pubmed: 18154502
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2012). Dual process theories of deductive reasoning: facts and fallacies. In K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 115–133). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199734689.013.0008
Ferrer, E., O’Hare, E. D., & Bunge, S. A. (2009). Fluid reasoning and the developing brain. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 3, 46–51. https://doi.org/10.3389/neuro.01.003.2009
doi: 10.3389/neuro.01.003.2009
pubmed: 19753096
pmcid: 2858618
Findley, K., & Lyford, A. (2019). Investigating students’ reasoning about sampling distributions through a resource perspective. Statistics Education Research Journal, 18(1), 26–45. https://doi.org/10.52041/serj.v18i1.148
doi: 10.52041/serj.v18i1.148
Font, V., Godino, J. D., & Gallardo, J. (2013). The emergence of objects from mathematical practices. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82, 97–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9411-0
doi: 10.1007/s10649-012-9411-0
Fyfe, E. R., McNeil, N. M., Son, J. Y., & Goldstone, R. L. (2014). Concreteness fading in mathematics and science instruction: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 9–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9249-3
doi: 10.1007/s10648-014-9249-3
Gangemi, A., Bourgeois-Gironde, S., & Mancini, F. (2015). Feelings of error in reasoning—In search of a phenomenon. Thinking & Reasoning, 21(4), 383–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2014.980755
doi: 10.1080/13546783.2014.980755
Garfield, J. B., Ben-Zvi, D., Chance, B., Medina, E., Roseth, C., & Zieffler, A. (2008). Developing students’ statistical reasoning: Connecting research and teaching practice. Springer.
Gehrke, M., Kistler, T., Lübke, K., Markgraf, N., Krol, B., & Sauer, S. (2021). Statistics education from a data-centric perspective. Teaching Statistics, 43(S1), S201–S215. https://doi.org/10.1111/test.12264
doi: 10.1111/test.12264
Gigerenzer, G. (2023). The Intelligence of Intuition. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009304887
doi: 10.1017/9781009304887
Gigerenzer, G., & Hoffrage, U. (1995). How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats. Psychological Review, 1(02), 684–704. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.4.684
doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.102.4.684
Gok, S., & Goldstone, R. L. (2022). Going beyond formalisms: A grounded and embodied learning approach to the design of pedagogical statistics simulations. The Journal of Applied Instructional Design. https://doi.org/10.51869/114/sgrg
doi: 10.51869/114/sgrg
Gok, S., & Goldstone, R. L. (2024). Using simulations to ground statistical inference in perception and action. Poster to be presented at 2024 American Educational Research Association Meeting.
Goldstone, R. L. (2019). Building inner tools. In M. Colombo, E. Irvine, & M. Stapleton (Eds.), Andy Clark and his critics (pp. 113–127). Oxford University Press.
doi: 10.1093/oso/9780190662813.003.0010
Goldstone, R. L., & Barsalou, L. W. (1998). Reuniting perception and conception. Cognition, 65(2–3), 231–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(97)00047-4
doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(97)00047-4
pubmed: 9557384
Goldstone, R. L., de Leeuw, J. R., & Landy, D. H. (2015). Fitting perception in and to cognition. Cognition, 135, 24–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.11.027
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.11.027
pubmed: 25496987
Goldstone, R. L., Landy, D. H., & Son, J. Y. (2010). The education of perception. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2(2), 265–284. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01055.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01055.x
pubmed: 25163789
Goldstone, R. L., Marghetis, T., Weitnauer, E., Ottmar, E. R., & Landy, D. (2017). Adapting perception, action, and technology for mathematical reasoning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(5), 434–441. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417704888
doi: 10.1177/0963721417704888
Goldstone, R. L., & Sakamoto, Y. (2003). The transfer of abstract principles governing complex adaptive systems. Cognitive Psychology, 46(4), 414–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0285(02)00519-4
doi: 10.1016/S0010-0285(02)00519-4
pubmed: 12809681
Goldstone, R. L., & Wilensky, U. (2008). Promoting transfer by grounding complex systems principles. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(4), 465–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400802394898
doi: 10.1080/10508400802394898
Grosz, M. (2023). Should researchers make causal inferences and recommendations for practice on the basis of non-experimental studies? Educational Psychology Review, 35, 37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09777-7
doi: 10.1007/s10648-023-09777-7
Haberman, J., & Whitney, D. (2009). Seeing the mean: ensemble coding for sets of faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35(3), 718. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013899
doi: 10.1037/a0013899
pubmed: 19485687
Hancock, S. A., & Rummerfield, W. (2020). Simulation methods for teaching sampling distributions: Should hands-on activities precede the computer? Journal of Statistics Education, 28(1), 9–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10691898.2020.1720551
doi: 10.1080/10691898.2020.1720551
Harsh, J. A., Campillo, M., Murray, C., Myers, C., Nguyen, J., & Maltese, A. V. (2019). “Seeing” data like an expert: An eye-tracking study using graphical data representations. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 18(3), 32. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-06-0102
doi: 10.1187/cbe.18-06-0102
Hayes, J. C., & Kraemer, D. J. (2017). Grounded understanding of abstract concepts: The case of STEM learning. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(7), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-016-0046-z
doi: 10.1186/s41235-016-0046-z
Heyvaert, M., Deleye, M., Saenen, L., Van Dooren, W., & Onghena, P. (2019). How do high school students solve probability problems? A mixed methods study on probabilistic reasoning. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 41(2), 184–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2017.1279138
doi: 10.1080/1743727X.2017.1279138
Hokor, E. K., Apawu, J., Owusu-Ansah, N. A., & Agormor, S. (2021). Preservice teachers’ misconceptions in solving probabilistic problems. Pedagogical Research, 7(1), em0112. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11441
doi: 10.29333/pr/11441
Houdé, O., & Borst, G. (2014). Measuring inhibitory control in children and adults: Brain imaging and mental chronometry. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 616. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00616
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00616
pubmed: 24994993
pmcid: 4061487
Hutchins, E. (2000). Distributed cognition. In International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences, Vol. 138 (pp. 1–10). Elsevier.
Jacob, B., & Doerr, H. M. (2014). Statistical reasoning with the sampling distribution. Quadrante, 23(2), 123–146. https://doi.org/10.48489/quadrante.22905
doi: 10.48489/quadrante.22905
Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2005). A model of heuristic judgment. In K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 267–293). Cambridge University Press.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3(3), 430–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(72)90016-3
doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(72)90016-3
Kaplan, J. J., Gabrosek, J. G., Curtiss, P., & Malone, C. (2014). Investigating student understanding of histograms. Journal of Statistics Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/10691898.2014.11889701
doi: 10.1080/10691898.2014.11889701
Kaplar, M., Lužanin, Z., & Verbić, S. (2021). Evidence of probability misconception in engineering students—Why even an inaccurate explanation is better than no explanation. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00279-y
doi: 10.1186/s40594-021-00279-y
Kellman, P. J., & Massey, C. M. (2013). Perceptual learning, cognition, and expertise. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 117–165). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407237-4.00004-9
doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-407237-4.00004-9
Khazanov, L., & Prado, L. (2010). Correcting students’ misconceptions about probability in an introductory college statistics course. Adults Learning Mathematics, 5(1), 23–35.
Koedinger, K. R., & Anderson, J. R. (1990). Abstract planning and perceptual chunks: Elements of expertise in geometry. Cognitive Science, 14(4), 511–550. https://doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(90)90008-K
doi: 10.1016/0364-0213(90)90008-K
Konold, C. (1989). Informal conceptions of probability. Cognition and Instruction, 6(1), 59–98. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0601_3
doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci0601_3
Konold, C., & Kazak, S. (2008). Reconnecting data and chance. Technology Innovations in Statistics Education, 2(1).
Konold, C., Pollatsek, A., Well, A. D., Lohmeier, J., & Lipson, A. (1993). Inconsistencies in students’ reasoning about probability. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24, 392–414. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.24.5.0392
doi: 10.5951/jresematheduc.24.5.0392
Landy, D., & Goldstone, R. L. (2007). How abstract is symbolic thought? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 33, 720–733. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.720
doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.720
Lau, J.S.-H., & Brady, T. F. (2018). Ensemble statistics accessed through proxies: Range heuristic and dependence on low-level properties in variability discrimination. Journal of Vision. https://doi.org/10.1167/18.9.3
doi: 10.1167/18.9.3
pubmed: 30193345
pmcid: 6126932
Lecoutre, M.-P. (1992). Cognitive models and problem spaces in “purely random” situations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 23(6), 557–568. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00540060
doi: 10.1007/BF00540060
Lee, C., & Meletiou, M. (2003). Some difficulties of learning histograms in introductory statistics. In Joint statistical meetings-section on statistical education (pp. 2326–2333). American Statistical Association. http://www.statlit.org/pdf/2003leeasa.pdf
Lehrer, R. (2017). Modeling signal-noise processes supports student construction of a hierarchical image of sample. Statistics Education Research Journal, 16(2), 64–85. https://doi.org/10.52041/serj.v16i2.185
doi: 10.52041/serj.v16i2.185
Lehrer, R., Jones, R. S., & Kim, M. J. (2014). Model-based informal inference. In K. Makar, B. de Sousa, & R. Gould (Eds.) Annual Research Meeting of National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. International Statistics Institute.
Leib, A. Y., Kosovicheva, A., & Whitney, D. (2015). Perceiving the lifelikeness of crowds: Summary statistical representations of abstract visual dimensions. Journal of Vision, 15(12), 1098–1098. https://doi.org/10.1167/15.12.1098
doi: 10.1167/15.12.1098
Lock, R. H., Lock, P. F., Morgan, K. L., Lock, E. F., & Lock, D. F. (2020). Statistics: Unlocking the power of data. Wiley.
Lunsford, M. L., Rowell, G. H., & Goodson-Espy, T. (2017). Classroom research: Assessment of student understanding of sampling distributions of means and the central limit theorem in post-calculus probability and statistics classes. Journal of Statistics Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/10691898.2006.11910587
doi: 10.1080/10691898.2006.11910587
Lupyan, G. (2017). Changing what you see by changing what you know: The role of attention. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 553. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00553
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00553
pubmed: 28507524
pmcid: 5410707
Lupyan, G., & Ward, E. J. (2013). Language can boost otherwise unseen objects into visual awareness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(35), 14196–14201. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1303312110
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1303312110
Lyford, A., & Boels, L. (2022). Using machine learning to understand students’ gaze patterns on graphing tasks. In S.A. Peters, L. Zapata-Cardona, F. Bonafini, & A. Fan (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Teaching Statistics (pp. 1–6). https://doi.org/10.52041/iase.icots11.T8D2
Macchi, L. (1995). Pragmatic aspects of the baserate fallacy. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48A, 188–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640749508401384
doi: 10.1080/14640749508401384
Makar, K., Bakker, A., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2011). The reasoning behind informal statistical inference. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 13(1–2), 152–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2011.538301
doi: 10.1080/10986065.2011.538301
Mareschal, D. (2016). The neuroscience of conceptual learning in science and mathematics. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 10, 114–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2016.06.001
doi: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2016.06.001
Maxara, C., & Biehler, R. (2006). Students’ probabilistic simulation and modeling competence after a computer-intensive elementary course in statistics and probability. In A. Rossman & B. Chance (Eds.), Proceeding of the seventh international conference on the teaching of statistics (pp. 1–6). International Association for Statistical Education.
Mayer, R. (2023). How to assess whether an instructional intervention has an effect on learning. Educational Psychology Review, 35, 64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09783-9
doi: 10.1007/s10648-023-09783-9
McDaniel, S. N., & Green, L. B. (2012). Using applets and video instruction to foster students’ understanding of sampling variability. Technology Innovations in Statistics Education. https://doi.org/10.5070/T561000177
doi: 10.5070/T561000177
McLean, J. A., & Doerr, H. M. (2015). The development of informal inferential reasoning via resampling: Eliciting bootstrapping methods. In T. Bartell, K. Bieda, R. Putnam, K. Bradfield, & H. Dominguez (Eds.) Proceedings of the North American chapter of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (pp. 439–446). Michigan State University.
McLeod, P., et al. (1998). Introduction to connectionist modelling of cognitive processes. Oxford University Press.
Meletiou-Mavrotheris, M. (2007). The formalist mathematical tradition as an obstacle to stochastical reasoning. In K. Francois & J. P. V. Pendegem (Eds.), Philosophical dimensions in mathematics education (pp. 131–155). Springer.
doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-71575-9_7
Meletiou-Mavrotheris, M., & Paparistodemou, E. (2015). Developing students’ reasoning about samples and sampling in the context of informal inferences. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 88(3), 385–404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-014-9551-5
doi: 10.1007/s10649-014-9551-5
Michal, A. L., & Franconeri, S. L. (2017). Visual routines are associated with specific graph interpretations. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0059-2
doi: 10.1186/s41235-017-0059-2
Michal, A. L., Uttal, D., Shah, P., & Franconeri, S. L. (2016). Visual routines for extracting magnitude relations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, 1802–1809. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1047-0
doi: 10.3758/s13423-016-1047-0
Moore, D. (1998). Statistics among the liberal arts. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 93(444), 1253–1259. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1998.10473786
doi: 10.1080/01621459.1998.10473786
Nathan, M. J. (2020). Foundations of embodied learning: A paradigm for education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429329098
doi: 10.4324/9780429329098
Nathan, M. J., & Walkington, C. (2017). Grounded and embodied mathematical cognition: Promoting mathematical insight and proof using action and language. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(9), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-016-0040-5
doi: 10.1186/s41235-016-0040-5
Newman, G. E., & Scholl, B. J. (2012). Bar graphs depicting averages are perceptually misinterpreted: The within-the-bar bias. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(4), 601–607. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0247-5
doi: 10.3758/s13423-012-0247-5
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Frels, R. (2016). Seven steps to a comprehensive literature review: A multimodal and cultural approach. Sage Publications.
Park, M., & Lee, E. J. (2019). Korean preservice elementary teachers’ abilities to identify equiprobability bias and teaching strategies. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17, 1585–1603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9933-8
doi: 10.1007/s10763-018-9933-8
Pfannkuch, M., Arnold, P., & Wild, C. J. (2015). What I see is not quite the way it really is: Students’ emergent reasoning about sampling variability. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 88(3), 343–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-014-9539-1
doi: 10.1007/s10649-014-9539-1
Pfannkuch, M., Ben-Zvi, D., & Budgett, S. (2018). Innovations in statistical modeling to connect data, chance and context. ZDM, 50(7), 1113–1123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0989-2
doi: 10.1007/s11858-018-0989-2
Pratt, D., Johnston-Wilder, P., Ainley, J., & Mason, J. (2008). Local and global thinking in statistical inference. Statistics Education Research Journal, 7(2), 107–129.
doi: 10.52041/serj.v7i2.472
Purpura, D. J., Schmitt, S. A., & Ganley, C. M. (2017). Foundations of mathematics and literacy: The role of executive functioning components. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 153, 15–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2016.08.010
doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2016.08.010
pubmed: 27676183
Ridgway, J. (2016). Implications of the data revolution for statistics education. International Statistical Review, 84(3), 528–549. https://doi.org/10.1111/insr.12110
doi: 10.1111/insr.12110
Ridgway, J. (2022). Statistics for empowerment and social engagement. Springer.
doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-20748-8
Rodriguez-Cintron, L. M., Wright, C. E., Chubb, C., & Sperling, G. (2019). How can observers use perceived size? Centroid versus mean-size judgments. Journal of Vision, 19(3), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1167/19.3.3
doi: 10.1167/19.3.3
Rossman, A. J., & Chance, B. L. (2014). Using simulation-based inference for learning introductory statistics. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 6(4), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.1302
doi: 10.1002/wics.1302
Sagi, D., & Tanne, D. (1994). Perceptual learning: Learning to see. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 4(2), 195–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4388(94)90072-8
doi: 10.1016/0959-4388(94)90072-8
pubmed: 8038576
Saldanha, L. (2016). Conceptual issues in quantifying unusualness and conceiving stochastic experiments: Insights from students’ experiences in designing sampling simulations. Statistics Education Research Journal, 15(2), 81–105. https://doi.org/10.52041/serj.v15i2.242
doi: 10.52041/serj.v15i2.242
Saldanha, L., & Thompson, P. (2002). Conceptions of sample and their relationship to statistical inference. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 51(3), 257–270. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023692604014
doi: 10.1023/A:1023692604014
Saldanha, L. A., & Thompson, P. W. (2007). Exploring connections between sampling distributions and statistical inference: An analysis of students’ engagement and thinking in the context of instruction involving repeated sampling. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 2(3), 270–297.
doi: 10.29333/iejme/213
Salinas-Herrera, J., & Salinas-Hernández, U. (2022). Teaching and learning the notion of normal distribution using a digital resource. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 22(3), 576–590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-022-00226-1
doi: 10.1007/s42330-022-00226-1
Schreiter, S., & Vogel, M. (2023). Eye-tracking measures as indicators for a local vs. global view of data. Frontiers in Education, 7, 1058150. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.1058150
doi: 10.3389/feduc.2022.1058150
Schwartz, D. L., Goldman, S. R., Vye, N. J., & Barron, B. J. (1998). Aligning everyday and mathematical reasoning: The case of sampling assumptions. In Reflections on statistics: Learning, teaching, and assessment in grades K-12 (pp. 233–273). Routledge.
Schwarz, N., Strack, F., Hilton, D., & Naderer, G. (1991). Base rates, representativeness, and the logic of conversation: The contextual relevance of “irrelevant” information. Social Cognition, 9, 67–84. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.1991.9.1.67
doi: 10.1521/soco.1991.9.1.67
Sedlmeier, P. (1999). Improving statistical reasoning: Theoretical models and practical implications. Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410601247
doi: 10.4324/9781410601247
Sedlmeier, P., & Gigerenzer, G. (1997). Intuitions about sample size: The empirical law of large numbers. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 10(1), 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199703)10:1%3c33::AID-BDM244%3e3.0.CO;2-6
doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199703)10:1<33::AID-BDM244>3.0.CO;2-6
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), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00302715
doi: 10.1007/BF00302715
Sfard, A. (1992). Operational origins of mathematical objects and the quandary of reification: The case of function. In E. Dubinsky & G. Harel (Eds.), The concept of function: Aspects of epistemology and pedagogy, 25 (pp. 59–84). Mathematical Association of America.
Shtulman, A., & Legare, C. H. (2020). Competing explanations of competing explanations: Accounting for conflict between scientific and folk explanations. Topics in Cognitive Science, 12(4), 1337–1362. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12483
doi: 10.1111/tops.12483
pubmed: 31762226
Simon, G., Lubin, A., Houdé, O., & De Neys, W. (2015). Anterior cingulate cortex and intuitive bias detection during number conservation. Cognitive Neuroscience, 6(4), 158–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/17588928.2015.1036847
doi: 10.1080/17588928.2015.1036847
pubmed: 25932663
Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.3
doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.3
Smith, M. H. (2004). A sample/population size activity: Is it the sample size of the sample as a fraction of the population that matters? Journal of Statistics Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/10691898.2004.11910735
doi: 10.1080/10691898.2004.11910735
Son, J. Y., Blake, A. B., Fries, L., & Stigler, J. W. (2021). Modeling first: Applying learning science to the teaching of introductory statistics. Journal of Statistics and Data Science Education, 29(1), 4–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10691898.2020.1844106
doi: 10.1080/10691898.2020.1844106
Son, J. Y., Doumas, L. A., & Goldstone, R. L. (2010). When do words promote analogical transfer? The Journal of Problem Solving, 3(1), 4.
doi: 10.7771/1932-6246.1079
Son, J. Y., Ramos, P., DeWolf, M., Loftus, W., & Stigler, J. W. (2017). Exploring the practicing-connections hypothesis: Using gesture to support coordination of ideas in understanding a complex statistical concept. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 3, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0085-0
doi: 10.1186/s41235-017-0085-0
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. (2002). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics & biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 421–440). Cambridge University Press.
doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511808098.026
Tintle, N., Chance, B., Cobb, G., Roy, S., Swanson, T., & VanderStoep, J. (2015). Combating anti-statistical thinking using simulation-based methods throughout the undergraduate curriculum. The American Statistician, 69(4), 362–370.
doi: 10.1080/00031305.2015.1081619
Tintle, N., Chance, B. L., Cobb, G. W., Rossman, A. J., Roy, S., Swanson, T., & VanderStoep, J. (2020). Introduction to statistical investigations. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2015.1081619
doi: 10.1080/00031305.2015.1081619
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1971). Belief in the law of small numbers. Psychological Bulletin, 76(2), 105–110. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031322
doi: 10.1037/h0031322
Ullman, S. (1987). Visual routines. Readings in Computer Vision, 18, 298–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-051581-6.50035-0
doi: 10.1016/B978-0-08-051581-6.50035-0
van Dijke-Droogers, M., Drijvers, P., & Bakker, A. (2021a). Statistical modeling processes through the lens of instrumental genesis. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 107(2), 235–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-10023-y
doi: 10.1007/s10649-020-10023-y
van Dijke-Droogers, M., Drijvers, P., & Bakker, A. (2021b). Introducing statistical inference: Design of a theoretically and empirically based learning trajectory. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10208-8
doi: 10.1007/s10763-021-10208-8
Vanhoof, S., Sotos. A. E. C., Onghena, P., & Verschaffel, L. (2007). Students’ reasoning about sampling distributions before and after the Sampling Distribution Activity. In M. I. Gomes & J. A. P. Martins (Eds.), Proceedings of the 56th session of the international statistical institute (pp. 4967–4701). International Statistical Institute. https://iase-web.org/documents/papers/isi56/CPM80_Vanhoof.pdf?1402524979
Vaughn, B. K. (2009). An empirical consideration of the use of R in actively constructing sampling distributions. Journal of Educational Technology, 6(2), 50–62.
Watkins, A. E., Bargagliotti, A., & Franklin, C. (2014). Simulation of the sampling distribution of the mean can mislead. Journal of Statistics Education, 22, 3. https://doi.org/10.1080/10691898.2014.11889716
doi: 10.1080/10691898.2014.11889716
Weisberg, S. M., & Newcombe, N. S. (2017). Embodied cognition and STEM learning: Overview of a topical collection in CR: PI. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0071-6
doi: 10.1186/s41235-017-0071-6
Well, A. D., Pollatsek, A., & Boyce, S. J. (1990). Understanding the effects of sample size on the variability of the mean. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47(2), 289–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(90)90040-G
doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(90)90040-G
Xiong, C., Lee-Robbins, E., Zhang, I., Gaba, A., & Franconeri, S. (2022). Reasoning affordances with tables and bar charts. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2022.3232959
doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2022.3232959
pubmed: 37015636
Yang, Y., Tokita, M., & Ishiguchi, A. (2018). Is there a common summary statistical process for representing the mean and variance? A study using illustrations of familiar items. Perception. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041669517747297
doi: 10.1177/2041669517747297
Yu, J., Goldstone, R. L., & Landy, D. (2018). Experientially grounded learning about the roles of variability, sample size, and difference between means in statistical reasoning. In Proceedings of the 40th annual conference of the cognitive science society. (pp. 2744–2749). Cognitive Science Society. https://cogsci.mindmodeling.org/2018/papers/0520/0520.pdf
Yu, J., Landy, D., & Goldstone, R. L. (2018). Visual flexibility in arithmetic expressions. In Proceedings of the 40th annual conference of the cognitive science society. (pp. 2750–2755). Cognitive Science Society. https://cogsci.mindmodeling.org/2018/papers/0521/0521.pdf
Zelazo, P. D. (2015). Executive function: Reflection, iterative reprocessing, complexity, and the developing brain. Developmental Review, 38, 55–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2015.07.001
doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2015.07.001
Zhang, I. Y., Tucker, M. C., & Stigler, J. W. (2022). Watching a hands-on activity improves students’ understanding of randomness. Computers & Education, 186, 104545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104545
doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104545