The representations of the arithmetic operations include functional relationships

Current theories of mathematical problem solving propose that people select a mathematical operation as the solution to a problem on the basis of a structure mapping between their problem representation and the representation of the mathematical operations. The structure-mapping hypothesis requires that the problem and the mathematical representations contain analogous relations. Past research has demonstrated that the problem representation consists of functional relationships, orprinciples. The present study tested whether people represent analogous principles for each arithmetic operation (i.e., addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division). For each operation, college (Experiments 1 and 2) and 8th grade (Experiment 2) participants were asked to rate the degree to which a set of completed problems was a good attempt at the operation. The pattern of presented answers either violated one of four principles or did not violate any principles. The distance of the presented answers from the correct answers was independently manipulated. Consistent with the hypothesis that people represent the principles, (1) violations of the principles were rated as poorer attempts at the operation, (2) operations that are learned first (e.g., addition) had more extensive principle representations than did operations learned later (multiplication), and (3) principles that are more frequently in evidence developed more quickly. In Experiment 3, college participants rated the degree to which statements were indicative of each operation. The statements were either consistent or inconsistent with one of two principles. The participants’ ratings showed that operations with longer developmental histories had strong principle representations. The implications for a structure-mapping approach to mathematical problem solving are discussed.

[1]  D. Gentner,et al.  Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. , 1997 .

[2]  D. Geary,et al.  Reflections of evolution and culture in children's cognition. Implications for mathematical development and instruction. , 1995, The American psychologist.

[3]  Miriam Bassok,et al.  Adding Apples and Oranges: Alignment of Semantic and Formal Knowledge , 1998, Cognitive Psychology.

[4]  J. Dixon,et al.  Generating initial models for reasoning. , 2001, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[5]  Robert S. Siegler,et al.  The relation between conceptual and procedural knowledge in learning mathematics: A review , 2021, The Development of Mathematical Skills.

[6]  I P Levin,et al.  Information integration in price-quality tradeoffs: The effect of missing information , 1984, Memory & cognition.

[7]  C. Moore,et al.  Characterizing the intuitive representation in problem solving: Evidence from evaluating mathematical strategies , 1997, Memory & cognition.

[8]  C. Surber The Development of Reversible Operations in Judgments of Ability, Effort, and Performance. , 1980 .

[9]  Beth A. Haines,et al.  Components of Understanding in Proportional Reasoning: A Fuzzy Set Representation of Developmental Progressions , 1991 .

[10]  M. Perlmutter,et al.  Cognitive arithmetic: comparison of operations. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[11]  D. Gentner Structure‐Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy* , 1983 .

[12]  S. S. Stevens Chapter 11 – PERCEPTUAL MAGNITUDE AND ITS MEASUREMENT , 1974 .

[13]  W Kintsch,et al.  Understanding and solving word arithmetic problems. , 1985, Psychological review.

[14]  L E Krueger,et al.  Why 2 + 2 = 5 looks so wrong: On the odd-even rule in sum verification , 1984, Memory & cognition.

[15]  C. Hirsch Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics , 1988 .

[16]  W. Schneider,et al.  Chess expertise and memory for chess positions in children and adults. , 1993, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[17]  L E Krueger,et al.  Why 2×2=5 looks so wrong: On the odd-even rule in product verification , 1986, Memory & cognition.

[18]  A. Su,et al.  The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics , 1932, The Mathematical Gazette.

[19]  Jamie I. D. Campbell Division by multiplication , 1999, Memory & cognition.

[20]  C. Moore,et al.  The Developmental Role of Intuitive Principles in Choosing Mathematical Strategies. , 1996 .

[21]  Brian H. Ross,et al.  Effects of principle explanation and superficial similarity on analogical mapping in problem solving. , 1997 .

[22]  J. Mestre,et al.  The relation between problem categorization and problem solving among experts and novices , 1989, Memory & cognition.

[23]  K. Holyoak,et al.  Mathematical problem solving by analogy. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[24]  Kathleen M. H. Brady National Center for Education Statistics Home Page , 2000 .

[25]  David C. Geary,et al.  Children's Mathematical Development: Research and Practical Applications , 1996 .

[26]  L. Reder,et al.  What affects strategy selection in arithmetic? The example of parity and five effects on product verification , 1999, Memory & cognition.