Reasoning Under Uncertainty: Maximum Likelihood Heuristic in a Problem With a Random Transfer

References

• Ansari, D., Lyons, I. M., van Eimeren, L., and Xu, F. (2007), “Linking Visual Attention and Number Processing in the Brain: The Role of the Temporo-Parietal Junction in Small and Large Symbolic and Nonsymbolic Number Comparison,” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 1845–1853. DOI: 10.1162/jocn.2007.19.11.1845.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Babai, R., Brecher, T., Stavy, R., and Tirosh, D. (2006), “Intuitive Interference in Probabilistic Reasoning,” International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4, 627–639. DOI: 10.1007/s10763-006-9031-1.
   Google Scholar
• Babai, R., Shalev, E., and Stavy, R. (2015), “A Warning Intervention Improves Students’ Ability to Overcome Intuitive Interference,” ZDM, 47, 735–745. DOI: 10.1007/s11858-015-0670-y.
   Google Scholar
• Babai, R., Zilber, H., Stavy, R., and Tirosh, D. (2010), “The Effect of Intervention on Accuracy of Students’ Responses and Reaction Times to Geometry Problems,” International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 185–201. DOI: 10.1007/s10763-009-9169-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banks, A. P., and Hope, C. (2014), “Heuristic and Analytic Processes in Reasoning: An Event-Related Potential Study of Belief Bias,” Psychophysiology, 51, 290–297. DOI: 10.1111/psyp.12169.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batanero, C., Henry, M., and Parzysz, B. (2005), “The Nature of Chance and Probability,” in Exploring Probability in School: Challenges for Teaching and Learning, ed. G. A. Jones, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer, pp. 15–37.
   Google Scholar
• Batanero, C., and Sanchez, E. (2005), “What Is the Nature of High School Students’ Conception and Misconceptions About Probability?,” in Exploring Probability in School: Challenges for Teaching and Learning, ed. G. A. Jones, New York, NY: Springer, pp. 241–266.
   Google Scholar
• Ben-Zvi, D., Aridor, K., Makar, K., and Bakker, A. (2012), “Students’ Emergent Articulations of Uncertainty While Making Informal Statistical Inferences,” ZDM, 44, 913–925.
   Google Scholar
• Bonner, C., and Newell, B. R. (2010), “In Conflict With Ourselves? An Investigation of Heuristic and Analytic Processes in Decision Making,” Memory & Cognition, 38, 186–196.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E. J. (2012), “Recognizing Revisitation of the Representativeness Heuristic: An Analysis of Answer Key Attributes,” ZDM, 44, 941–952, DOI: 10.1007/s11858-012-0435-9.
   Google Scholar
• Clement, J. (2000), “Analysis of Clinical Interviews: Foundations and Model Viability,” in Handbook of Research Methodologies for Science and Mathematics Education, eds. R. Lesh and A. Kelly, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 341–385.
   Google Scholar
• DasGupta, A. (2010), “Urn Models in Physics and Genetics,” in Fundamentals of Probability: A First Course, ed. A. DasGupta, New York, NY: Springer, pp. 379–407.
   Google Scholar
• Daston, L. (1980), “Probabilistic Expectation and Rationality in Classical Probability Theory,” Historia Mathematica, 7, 234–260. DOI: 10.1016/0315-0860(80)90025-7.
   Google Scholar
• Denes, G., and Pizzamiglio, L. (1999), Handbook of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, Hove, England: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• English, L. D., and Watson, J. M. (2016), “Development of Probabilistic Understanding in Fourth Grade,” Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 47, 27–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eshach, H., and Schwartz, J. (2002), “Understanding Children’s Comprehension of Visual Displays of Complex Information,” Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11, 333–346. DOI: 10.1023/A:1020690201324.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, J. S. B. T. (2006), “The Heuristic-Analytic Theory of Reasoning: Extension and Evaluation,” Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 378–395. DOI: 10.3758/BF03193858.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, J. S. B. T. (2010), “Intuition and Reasoning: A Dual-Process Perspective,” Psychological Inquiry, 21, 313–326.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, J. S. B. T., and Curtis-Holmes, J. (2005), “Rapid Responding Increases Belief Bias: Evidence for the Dual-Process Theory of Reasoning,” Thinking & Reasoning, 11, 382–389. DOI: 10.1080/13546780542000005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falk, R., Yudilevich-Assouline, P., and Elstein, A. (2012), “Children’s Concept of Probability as Inferred From Their Binary Choices—Revisited,” Educational Studies in Mathematics, 81, 207–233. DOI: 10.1007/s10649-012-9402-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischbein, E. (1987), Intuition in Science and Mathematics, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.
   Google Scholar
• Fischbein, E., and Schnarch, D. (1997), “The Evolution With Age of Probabilistic Intuitively Based Misconceptions,” Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 96–105. DOI: 10.2307/749665.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P., and ABC Research Group (1999), Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart, New York. NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Giuliano, M. G., Nemirovsky, I., Concari, S., Pérez, S., Alvarez, M., Sacerdoti, A., and Pereziano, M. (2006), “Conceptions About Probability and Accuracy in Argentine Students Who Start a Career in Engineering,” Paper Presented at the 7th International Conference on Teaching Statistics, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
   Google Scholar
• Hartzel, J., Agresti, A., and Caffo, B. (2001), “Multinomial Logit Random Effects Models,” Statistical Modelling, 1, 81–102. DOI: 10.1177/1471082X0100100201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heyvaert, M., Deleye, M., Saenen, L., Van Dooren, W., and Onghena, P. (2018), “How Do High School Students Solve Probability Problems? A Mixed Methods Study on Probabilistic Reasoning,” International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 41, 184–206. DOI: 10.1080/1743727X.2017.1279138.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirsch, L. S., and O’Donnell, A. M. (2001), “Representativeness in Statistical Reasoning: Identifying and Assessing Misconceptions,” Journal of Statistics Education, 9, 61–82. DOI: 10.1080/10691898.2001.11910655.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, N. L., and Kotz, S. (1977), Urn Models and Their Application, New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, G., Langrall, C., and Mooney, E. (2007), “Research in Probability: Responding to Classroom Realities,” in The Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics, ed. F. Lester, Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, pp. 909–956.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D. (2000), “A Psychological Point of View: Violations of Rational Rules as a Diagnostic of Mental Processes,” Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 681–683. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X00403432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D. (2011), Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York, N: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., and Frederick, S. (2002), “Representativeness Revisited: Attribute Substitution in Intuitive Judgment,” in Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, eds. T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, and D. Kahneman, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, pp. 49–81.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., and Frederick, S. (2005), “A Model of Heuristic Judgment,” in The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning, eds. K. J. Holyoak and R. G. Morrison, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, pp. 93–267.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., and Tversky, A. (1982), Judgments Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A. (1973), “Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability,” Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207–232. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kapon, S., Ron, G., Hershkowitz, R., and Dreyfus, T. (2015), “Perceiving Permutations as Distinct Outcomes: The Accommodation of a Complex Knowledge System,” Educational Studies in Mathematics, 88, 43–64. DOI: 10.1007/s10649-014-9570-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khazanov, L. (2008), “Addressing Students’ Misconceptions About Probability During the First Years of College,” Mathematics and Computer Education, 42, 180–192.
   Google Scholar
• Klaczynski, P. A. (2001), “Analytic and Heuristic Processing Influences on Adolescent Reasoning and Decision-Making,” Child Development, 72, 844–861. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8624.00319.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konold, C. (1989), “Informal Conceptions of Probability,” Cognition and Instruction, 6, 59–98. DOI: 10.1207/s1532690xci0601_3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konold, C., Pollatsek, A., Well, A., Lohmeier, J., and Lipson, L. (1993), “Inconsistencies in Students’ Reasoning About Probability,” Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24, 392–414. DOI: 10.2307/749150.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leron, U., and Hazzan, O. (2009), “Intuitive Vs Analytical Thinking: Four Perspectives,” Educational Studies in Mathematics, 71, 263–278. DOI: 10.1007/s10649-008-9175-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leth-Steensen, C., Elbaz, Z. K., and Douglas, V. I. (2000), “Mean Response Times, Variability and Skew in the Responding of ADHD Children: A Response Time Distributional Approach,” Acta Psychologica, 104, 167–190. DOI: 10.1016/S0001-6918(00)00019-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, M. A. (2003), “‘It’s Like … You Know’: The Use of Analogies and Heuristics in Teaching Introductory Statistical Methods,” Journal of Statistics Education, 11.
   Google Scholar
• Meder, B., and Gigerenzer, G. (2014), “Statistical Thinking: No One Left Behind,” in Probabilistic Thinking: Presenting Plural Perspectives, eds. E. J. Chernoff and B. Sriraman, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, pp. 127–148.
   Google Scholar
• Metin, B., Roeyers, H., Wiersema, J. R., van der Meere, J. J., Thompson, M., and Sonuga-Barke, E. (2013), “ADHD Performance Reflects Inefficient But Not Impulsive Information Processing: A Diffusion Model Analysis,” Neuropsychology, 27, 193–200. DOI: 10.1037/a0031533.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monson, R. (1980), Occupational Epidemiology, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Oleckno, W. A. (2008), Epidemiology: Concepts and Methods, Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, L., Bulthé, J., Daniels, N., de Beeck, H. O., and De Smedt, B. (2018), “Dyscalculia and Dyslexia: Different Behavioral, Yet Similar Brain Activity Profiles During Arithmetic,” NeuroImage: Clinical, 18, 663–674. DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2018.03.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pratt, D. (2005), “How Do Teachers Foster Understanding of Probability?,” in Exploring Probability in School: Challenges for Teaching and Learning, ed. G. A. Jones, New York, NY: Springer, pp. 171–190.
   Google Scholar
• Rubel, L. H. (2007), “Middle School and High School Students’ Probabilistic Reasoning on Coin Tasks,” Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 531–556.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sowey, E. R. (2001), “Striking Demonstrations in Teaching Statistics,” Journal of Statistics Education, 9. DOI: 10.1080/10691898.2001.11910647.
   Google Scholar
• Spieler, D. H. (2000), “Reaction Time,” in Encyclopedia of Psychology (Vol. 7), ed. A. E. Kazdin, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 12–14.
   Google Scholar
• Stavy, R., Babai, R., and Kallai, A. (2016), “The Role of Congruity and Salience—Behavioral and Imaging Research,” Zeitschrift Für Psychologie, 224, 266–276. DOI: 10.1027/2151-2604/a000262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stavy, R., Babai, R., Tsamir, D., Tirosh, D., Lin, F. L., and McRobbie, C. (2006), “Are Intuitive Rules Universal?,” International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4, 417–436. DOI: 10.1007/s10763-005-9012-9.
   Google Scholar
• Stavy, R., and Tirosh, D. (1996), “Intuitive Rules in Science and Mathematics: The Case of ‘More of A-More of B,” International Journal of Science Education, 18, 653–667. DOI: 10.1080/0950069960180602.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stavy, R., and Tirosh, D. (2000), How Students (Mis-)Understand Science and Mathematics, Intuitive Rules, New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stupple, E. J. N., Ball, L. J., and Ellis, D. (2013), “Matching Bias in Syllogistic Reasoning: Evidence for a Dual-Process Account From Response Times and Confidence Ratings,” Thinking & Reasoning, 19, 54–77. DOI: 10.1080/13546783.2012.735622.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taubes, G. (1995), “Epidemiology Faces Its Limits,” Science, 269, 164–169. DOI: 10.1126/science.7618077.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tversky, A., and Kahneman, D. (1983), “Extensional Versus Intuitive Reasoning: The Conjunctive Fallacy in Probability Judgment,” Psychological Review, 90, 293–315. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.90.4.293.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vosniadou, S., Ioannides, C., Dimitrakopoulou, A., and Papademetriou, E. (2001), “Designing Learning Environments to Promote Conceptual Change in Science,” Learning and Instruction, 11, 381–419. DOI: 10.1016/S0959-4752(00)00038-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson, J. M., and Kelly, B. A. (2009), “Development of Student Understanding of Outcomes Involving Two or More Dice,” International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 25–54. DOI: 10.1007/s10763-007-9071-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wedell, D. H. (2011), “Probabilistic Reasoning in Prediction and Diagnosis: Effects of Problem Type, Response Mode, and Individual Differences,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 24, 157–179. DOI: 10.1002/bdm.686.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar