What we count dictates how we count: A tale of two encodings
We argue that what we count has a crucial impact on how we count, to the extent that even adults may have difficulty using elementary mathematical notions in concrete situations. Specifically, we investigate how the use of certain types of quantities (durations, heights, number of floors) may emphas...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Elsevier B.V.
2021
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | View Fulltext in Publisher |
LEADER | 03129nam a2200529Ia 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | 10.1016-j.cognition.2021.104665 | ||
008 | 220427s2021 CNT 000 0 und d | ||
020 | |a 00100277 (ISSN) | ||
245 | 1 | 0 | |a What we count dictates how we count: A tale of two encodings |
260 | 0 | |b Elsevier B.V. |c 2021 | |
856 | |z View Fulltext in Publisher |u https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104665 | ||
520 | 3 | |a We argue that what we count has a crucial impact on how we count, to the extent that even adults may have difficulty using elementary mathematical notions in concrete situations. Specifically, we investigate how the use of certain types of quantities (durations, heights, number of floors) may emphasize the ordinality of the numbers featured in a problem, whereas other quantities (collections, weights, prices) may emphasize the cardinality of the depicted numerical situations. We suggest that this distinction leads to the construction of one of two possible encodings, either a cardinal or an ordinal representation. This difference should, in turn, constrain the way we approach problems, influencing our mathematical reasoning in multiple activities. This hypothesis is tested in six experiments (N = 916), using different versions of multiple-strategy arithmetic word problems. We show that the distinction between cardinal and ordinal quantities predicts problem sorting (Experiment 1), perception of similarity between problems (Experiment 2), direct problem comparison (Experiment 3), choice of a solving algorithm (Experiment 4), problem solvability estimation (Experiment 5) and solution validity assessment (Experiment 6). The results provide converging clues shedding light into the fundamental importance of the cardinal versus ordinal distinction on adults' reasoning about numerical situations. Overall, we report multiple evidence that general, non-mathematical knowledge associated with the use of different quantities shapes adults' encoding, recoding and solving of mathematical word problems. The implications regarding mathematical cognition and theories of arithmetic problem solving are discussed. © 2021 Elsevier B.V. | |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a adult |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Adult |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a algorithm |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a arithmetic |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Arithmetic problem solving |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a article |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Cardinality |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a cognition |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Cognition |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a cognitive model |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a female |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a human |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a human experiment |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Humans |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a knowledge |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Knowledge |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a major clinical study |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a male |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Mathematical reasoning |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a mathematics |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Mathematics |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Mental model |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a numerical cognition |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Numerical cognition |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Ordinality |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a perception |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a price |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a problem solving |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Problem Solving |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a reasoning |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a validity |
700 | 1 | |a Gros, H. |e author | |
700 | 1 | |a Sander, E. |e author | |
700 | 1 | |a Thibaut, J.-P. |e author | |
773 | |t Cognition |