Developing Statistics Cognitions

2017 ◽  
pp. 57-95
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Development ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Statistics Education ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Dual Process Theory ◽  
Process Theory

This chapter focuses on the development of statistics cognition, framing the discussion on the need to enhance cognitive development. We argue that by understanding how cognitive processes have been shown to inhibit learning, we can differentiate between types of errors in statistics education. By understanding the operationalized difference of a bias and misconception, those interested in statistics education can identify the sources of these errors, and subsequently develop a means to attenuate their effect. Using dual process theory, we argue that classifying the source of errors and differentiating between biases and misconceptions educators can use errors to enhance the development of statistics literacy, reasoning, and thinking.

Cognitive processes in gambling judgments: A test of Dual Process Theory

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clint Norseth ◽  
Amy Trevethan ◽  
Jessica Dugan ◽  
Karl Wolff ◽  
Aaron Ashley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Dual Process Theory ◽  
Process Theory

Time, flow, and space

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig Callender
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Dual Process Theory ◽  
Process Theory ◽  
Space And Time ◽  
Time Flow ◽  
Flow Of Time ◽  
The Brain

Abstract Does a temporal dual process theory explain the illusive flow of time? I point out one shortcoming of such a theory and propose an alternative that does not require either dual cognitive processes or demand such a stark asymmetry between space and time in the brain.

scholarly journals Enhancing the Wisdom of the Crowd With Cognitive-Process Diversity: The Benefits of Aggregating Intuitive and Analytical Judgments

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (10) ◽  
pp. 1272-1282
Author(s):  
Steffen Keck ◽  
Wenjie Tang
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Cognitive Process ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Dual Process Theory ◽  
Process Theory ◽  
Historical Events ◽  
Aggregation Procedure ◽  
Probabilistic Forecasts ◽  
Events Study

Drawing on dual-process theory, we suggest that the benefits that arise from combining several quantitative individual judgments will be heightened when these judgments are based on different cognitive processes. We tested this hypothesis in three experimental studies in which participants provided estimates for the dates of different historical events (Study 1, N = 152), made probabilistic forecasts for the outcomes of soccer games (Study 2, N = 98), and estimated the weight of individuals on the basis of a photograph (Study 3, N = 3,695). For each of these tasks, participants were prompted to make judgments relying on an analytical process, on their intuition, or (in a control condition) on no specific instructions. Across all three studies, our results show that an aggregation of intuitive and analytical judgments provides more accurate estimates than any other aggregation procedure and that this advantage increases with the number of aggregated judgments.

Reflective Knowledge

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chienkuo Mi ◽  
Shane Ryan
Keyword(s):  
Extended Cognition ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Dual Process Theory ◽  
Process Theory ◽  
Reflective Knowledge ◽  
Epistemological Disjunctivism ◽  
Recent Account

In this paper, we defend the claim that reflective knowledge is necessary for extended knowledge. We begin by examining a recent account of extended knowledge provided by Palermos and Pritchard (2013). We note a weakness with that account and a challenge facing theorists of extended knowledge. The challenge that we identify is to articulate the extended cognition condition necessary for extended knowledge in such a way as to avoid counterexample from the revamped Careless Math Student and Truetemp cases. We consider but reject Pritchard’s (2012b) epistemological disjunctivism as providing a model for doing so. Instead, we set out an account of reflection informed by Confucianism and dual-process theory. We make the case that reflective knowledge offers a way of overcoming the challenge identified. We show why such knowledge is necessary for extended knowledge, while building on Sosa’s (2012) account of meta-competence.

scholarly journals Dual Process Theory and Intermediate Effect: Are Faculty and Residents' Performance on Multiple-Choice, Licensing Exam Questions Different?

2015 ◽  
Vol 180 (suppl_4) ◽  
pp. 92-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ting Dong ◽  
Steven J. Durning ◽  
Anthony R. Artino ◽  
Cees van der Vleuten ◽  
Eric Holmboe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Reading Time ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Dual Process Theory ◽  
Process Theory ◽  
Unexpected Finding ◽  
Licensing Examination ◽  
Intermediate Effect

ABSTRACT Background: Clinical reasoning is essential for the practice of medicine. Dual process theory conceptualizes reasoning as falling into two general categories: nonanalytic reasoning (pattern recognition) and analytic reasoning (active comparing and contrasting of alternatives). The debate continues regarding how expert performance develops and how individuals make the best use of analytic and nonanalytic processes. Several investigators have identified the unexpected finding that intermediates tend to perform better on licensing examination items than experts, which has been termed the “intermediate effect.” Purpose: We explored differences between faculty and residents on multiple-choice questions (MCQs) using dual process measures (both reading and answering times) to inform this ongoing debate. Method: Faculty (board-certified internists; experts) and residents (internal medicine interns; intermediates) answered live licensing examination MCQs (U.S. Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Knowledge and American Board of Internal Medicine Certifying Examination) while being timed. We conducted repeated analysis of variance to compare the 2 groups on average reading time, answering time, and accuracy on various types of items. Results: Faculty and residents did not differ significantly in reading time [F (1, 35) = 0.01, p = 0.93], answering time [F (1, 35) = 0.60, p = 0.44], or accuracy [F (1, 35) = 0.24, p = 0.63] regardless of easy or hard items. Discussion: Dual process theory was not evidenced in this study. However, this lack of difference between faculty and residents may have been affected by the small sample size of participants and MCQs may not reflect how physicians made decisions in actual practice setting.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document