Disentangling magnitude processing, natural number biases, and benchmarking in fraction comparison tasks: A person-centered Bayesian classification approach
{"title":"Disentangling magnitude processing, natural number biases, and benchmarking in fraction comparison tasks: A person-centered Bayesian classification approach","authors":"Frank Reinhold , Timo Leuders , Katharina Loibl","doi":"10.1016/j.cedpsych.2023.102224","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Research on fraction comparison shows that students often follow biased comparison strategies, in particular such strategies that build on their knowledge of natural numbers. On the other hand they also apply successful comparison strategies such as benchmarking or fraction magnitude processing. Which strategies are applied or even combined depends on the students’ knowledge and on the task type. To investigate these complex relationships, we developed a balanced 2 × 2-dimensional itemset (congruent vs. incongruent items; benchmarking vs. non-benchmarking items) and a Bayesian classification of individual students’ performance (solution patters, response time, and individual distance effect), which we applied to an assessment of <em>N</em> = 350 sixth graders. We could show that the classification of the students with respect to possible solution strategies matched our hypotheses: We could replicate existing patterns <em>and</em> found additional composite strategies such as ‘benchmarking or bias‘ with a bias only in solution rates of non-benchmark items. In further analyses we found ‘benchmarking or suppressed bias-strategies (i.e., a bias in problem solving time of non-benchmarking items). Our study extends previous knowledge on individual strategies in fraction comparison and proposes a new person-centered approach to classify individual student profiles even with small profile sizes.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10635,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Educational Psychology","volume":"75 ","pages":"Article 102224"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Educational Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361476X23000784","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Research on fraction comparison shows that students often follow biased comparison strategies, in particular such strategies that build on their knowledge of natural numbers. On the other hand they also apply successful comparison strategies such as benchmarking or fraction magnitude processing. Which strategies are applied or even combined depends on the students’ knowledge and on the task type. To investigate these complex relationships, we developed a balanced 2 × 2-dimensional itemset (congruent vs. incongruent items; benchmarking vs. non-benchmarking items) and a Bayesian classification of individual students’ performance (solution patters, response time, and individual distance effect), which we applied to an assessment of N = 350 sixth graders. We could show that the classification of the students with respect to possible solution strategies matched our hypotheses: We could replicate existing patterns and found additional composite strategies such as ‘benchmarking or bias‘ with a bias only in solution rates of non-benchmark items. In further analyses we found ‘benchmarking or suppressed bias-strategies (i.e., a bias in problem solving time of non-benchmarking items). Our study extends previous knowledge on individual strategies in fraction comparison and proposes a new person-centered approach to classify individual student profiles even with small profile sizes.
期刊介绍:
Contemporary Educational Psychology is a scholarly journal that publishes empirical research from various parts of the world. The research aims to substantially advance, extend, or re-envision the ongoing discourse in educational psychology research and practice. To be considered for publication, manuscripts must be well-grounded in a comprehensive theoretical and empirical framework. This framework should raise critical and timely questions that educational psychology currently faces. Additionally, the questions asked should be closely related to the chosen methodological approach, and the authors should provide actionable implications for education research and practice. The journal seeks to publish manuscripts that offer cutting-edge theoretical and methodological perspectives on critical and timely education questions.
The journal is abstracted and indexed in various databases, including Contents Pages in Education, Australian Educational Index, Current Contents, EBSCOhost, Education Index, ERA, PsycINFO, Sociology of Education Abstracts, PubMed/Medline, BIOSIS Previews, and others.