Unasked But Answered: Comparing the Relative Probabilities of Coin Flip Sequence Attributes

REFERENCES

• Abrahamson, D. (2009). Orchestrating semiotic leaps from tacit to cultural quantitative reasoning—The case of anticipating experimental outcomes of a quasi-binomial random generator. Cognition and Instruction, 27(3), 175–224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batanero, C., & Serrano, L. (1999). The meaning of randomness for secondary school students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(5), 558567.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borovcnik, M., & Bentz, H. (1991). Empirical research in understanding probability. In R. Kapadia & M. Borovcnik (Eds.), Chance encounters: Probability in education (pp. 73–106). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J. (2008). Sample space: An investigative lens. In J. Cortina (Ed.), Proceedings of the joint meeting of the International Group and the North American Chapter for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 15, pp. 313–320). Michoacn, Mexico: Cinvestav-UMSNH.
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J. (2009a). Explicating the multivalence of a probability task. In S.L. Swars, D.W. Stinson, & S. Lemons-Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of the thirty-first annual meeting of the North-American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 15, pp. 653–661). Atlanta, GA: Georgia State University.
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J. (2009b). Sample space partitions: An investigative lens. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 28(1), 19–29. doi: 10.1016/j.jmathb.2009.03.002
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J. (2009c). The subjective-sample-space. In S.L. Swars, D.W. Stinson, & S. Lemons-Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of the thirty-first annual meeting of the North-American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 15, pp. 628–635). Atlanta, GA: Georgia State University.
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J. (2011). Investigating relative likelihood comparisons of multinomial, contextual sequences. In M. Pytlak, T. Rowland, & E. Swoboda (Eds.), Proceedings of the seventh congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 755–765). Rzeszów, Poland: University of Rzeszów.
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J. (2012a). Logically fallacious relative likelihood comparisons: The fallacy of composition. Experiments in Education, 40(4), 77–84.
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J. (2012b). Providing answers to a question that was not asked. In S. Brown, S. Larsen, K. Marrongelle, & M. Oehrtman (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th annual conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (pp. 32–38). Portland, OR: SIGMAA on RUME.
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J. (2012c). Recognizing revisitation of the representativeness heuristic: an analysis of answer key attributes. ZDM - The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 44(7), 941–952. doi: 10.1007/s11858-012-0435-9
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J. (2012d). Unintended relative likelihood comparisons. Proceedings of the 12th International Congress on Mathematics Education (ICME-12), COEX, Seoul, South Korea. Retrieved from http://www.icme12.org/upload/UpFile2/TSG/0221.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E. J. (2013). Probabilistic relativism: A multivalentological investigation of normatively incorrect relative likelihood comparisons [Special issue: Postmodern Mathematics/Mathematics Education]. Philosophy of Mathematics Education Journal, 27, 130. Retrieved from http://people.exeter.ac.uk/PErnest/pome27/index.html
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J., & Russell, G.L. (2011a). An informal fallacy in teachers’ reasoning about probability. In L.R. Wiest & T. Lamberg (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 241–249). Reno, NV: University of Nevada, Reno.
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J., & Russell, G.L. (2011b). An investigation of relative likelihood comparisons: The composition fallacy. In B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proceedings of the thirty fifth annual meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 15, pp. 225–232). Ankara, Turkey: Middle East Technical University.
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J., & Russell, G.L. (2011c). The sample space: One of many ways to partition the set of all possible outcomes. The Australian Mathematics Teacher, 67(2), 24–29.
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J., & Russell, G.L. (2012a). The fallacy of composition: Prospective mathematics teachers’ use of logical fallacies. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 12(3), 259–271. doi: 10.1080/14926156.2012.704128
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J., & Russell, G.L. (2012b). Why order does not matter: An appeal to ignorance. In Van R. Zoest, L.R., Lo, J.J., & Kratky, J.L. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 1045–1052). Kalamazoo, MI: Western Michigan University.
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J., & Zazkis, R. (2010). A problem with the problem of points. In P. Brosnan, D. Erchick, & L. Flevares (Eds.), Proceedings of the thirty-second annual meeting of the North-American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 15, pp. 969–977). Columbus, OH: Ohio State University.
   Google Scholar
• Chernoff, E.J., & Zazkis, R. (2011). From personal to conventional probabilities: From sample set to sample space. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 77(1), 15–33. doi: 10.1007/s10649-010-9288-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox, C., & Mouw, J.T. (1992). Disruption of the representativeness heuristic: Can we be perturbed into using correct probabilistic reasoning? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 23(2), 163–178.
   Google Scholar
• Dubinsky, E. (1991). Reflective abstraction in advanced mathematical thinking. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 95–123). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Falk, R. (1981). The perception of randomness. In C. Laborde (), Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 222229). University of Grenoble.
   Google Scholar
• Gillard, E., Van Dooren, W., Schaeken, W., & Verschaffel, L. (2009). Dual-processes in the psychology of mathematics education and cognitive psychology. Human Development, 52(2), 95–108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaser, B. (2002). Conceptualization: On theory and theorizing using grounded theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), Article 3. Retrieved from http://www.ualberta.ca/~ijqm/
   Google Scholar
• Hazzan, O. (1999). Reducing abstraction level when learning abstract algebra concepts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40(1), 71–90.
   Google Scholar
• Hazzan, O., & Zazkis, R. (2005). Reducing abstraction: The case of school mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 58, 101–119.
   Google Scholar
• Hirsch, L.S., & O’Donnell, A.M. (2001). Representativeness in statistical reasoning: Identifying and assessing misconceptions. Journal of Statistics Education, 9(2). Retrieved from http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v9n2/hirsch.html
   Google Scholar
• Jones, G. A., Langrall, C. W., & Mooney E. S. (2007). Research in probability: Responding to classroom realities. In F. Lester (), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (, Vol. 2, pp. 909955). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing and National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D. (2002). Maps of bounded rationality: A perspective on intuitive judgment and choice (Nobel Prize Lecture). In T. Frangsmyr (Ed.), Les Prix Nobel (pp. 449–489). Retrieved from http://www.nobel.se/economics/laureates/2002/kahnemann-lecture.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 49–81). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430–454.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konold, C. (1989). Informal conceptions of probability. Cognition and Instruction, 6(1), 59–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konold, C., Pollatsek, A., Well, A., Lohmeier, J., & Lipson, A. (1993). Inconsistencies in students’ reasoning about probability. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24(5), 392–414.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lecoutre, M.-P. (1992). Cognitive models and problem spaces in “purely random” situations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 23(6), 557–569.
   Google Scholar
• Lipton, P. (1991). Inference to best explanation. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mamolo, A. (2014). How to act? A question of encapsulating infinity. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 14(1), 1–22.
   Google Scholar
• Mamolo, A., & Zazkis, R. (2014). Contextual considerations in probabilistic situations: An aid or a hindrance? In E. Chernoff & B. Srirman (Eds.), Probabilistic thinking: Presenting plural perspectives (pp. 641–656). Dordrechet, The Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Peirce, C.S. (1931). Principles of philosophy. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 15). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Retrieved from http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674138001&content=toc
   Google Scholar
• Rubel, L.H. (2007). Middle school and high school students’ probabilistic reasoning on coin tasks. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(5), 531–556.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaughnessy, J.M. (1977). Misconceptions of probability: An experiment with a small-group, activity based, model building approach to introductory probability at the college level. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 8, 285–316.
   Google Scholar
• Shaughnessy, J.M. (1981). Misconceptions of probability: From systematic errors to systematic experiments and decisions. In A. Schulte (Ed.), Teaching statistics and probability: Yearbook of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (pp. 90–100). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
   Google Scholar
• Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, P.W. (2008). Conceptual analysis of mathematical ideas: Some spadework at the foundations of mathematics education. In O. Figueras, J.L. Cortina, S. Alatorre, T. Rojano, & A. Sépulveda (Eds.), Plenary paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 15, pp. 45–64). Morélia, Mexico: PME. Retrieved from http://patthompson.net/PDFversions/2008ConceptualAnalysis.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1971). Belief in the law of small numbers. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 105–770.
   Google Scholar
• Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Von Glaserveld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism: a way of knowing and learning. Florence, KY: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar