游戏公平:儿童和成人对概率的理解研究

Q3 Social Sciences Statistics Education Research Journal Pub Date : 2022-02-28 DOI:10.52041/serj.v21i1.79
Rita Batista, Rute Borba, Ana Henriques
{"title":"游戏公平:儿童和成人对概率的理解研究","authors":"Rita Batista, Rute Borba, Ana Henriques","doi":"10.52041/serj.v21i1.79","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to analyse the reasoning that children and adults with the same school level use to assess and justify the fairness of games, considering aspects of probability such as randomness, sample space, and comparison of probabilities. Data collection included a Piagetian clinical interview based on games of chance. The results showed that the participants’ judgments about the fairness of the games depends mainly on the understanding about independence of events, analysis of the sample space, and perception of proportionality when comparing probabilities, and that they have misunderstandings about these ideas. The similar low performance of adults and children on probabilistic reasoning, indicates that the maturity and experience of these adults were not enough to properly develop probabilistic reasoning and to instrumentalize it to assess the fairness of a game consistently. Thus, teaching interventions to expand and consolidate students' learning in the field of probability are recommended and the activities presented in this study may serve as a basis for such interventions.","PeriodicalId":38581,"journal":{"name":"Statistics Education Research Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"FAIRNESS IN GAMES: A STUDY ON CHILDREN’S AND ADULTS’ UNDERSTANDING OF PROBABILITY\",\"authors\":\"Rita Batista, Rute Borba, Ana Henriques\",\"doi\":\"10.52041/serj.v21i1.79\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study aims to analyse the reasoning that children and adults with the same school level use to assess and justify the fairness of games, considering aspects of probability such as randomness, sample space, and comparison of probabilities. Data collection included a Piagetian clinical interview based on games of chance. The results showed that the participants’ judgments about the fairness of the games depends mainly on the understanding about independence of events, analysis of the sample space, and perception of proportionality when comparing probabilities, and that they have misunderstandings about these ideas. The similar low performance of adults and children on probabilistic reasoning, indicates that the maturity and experience of these adults were not enough to properly develop probabilistic reasoning and to instrumentalize it to assess the fairness of a game consistently. Thus, teaching interventions to expand and consolidate students' learning in the field of probability are recommended and the activities presented in this study may serve as a basis for such interventions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38581,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Statistics Education Research Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Statistics Education Research Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52041/serj.v21i1.79\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Statistics Education Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52041/serj.v21i1.79","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本研究旨在分析具有相同学校水平的儿童和成年人用来评估和证明游戏公平性的推理,考虑到随机性、样本空间和概率比较等概率方面。数据收集包括基于机会游戏的皮亚杰临床访谈。结果表明,参与者对游戏公平性的判断主要取决于对事件独立性的理解、对样本空间的分析以及在比较概率时对比例的感知,并且他们对这些想法存在误解。成年人和儿童在概率推理方面的表现相似,这表明这些成年人的成熟度和经验不足以正确发展概率推理,也不足以将其工具化,以一致地评估游戏的公平性。因此,建议采取教学干预措施来扩大和巩固学生在概率领域的学习,本研究中提出的活动可以作为此类干预措施的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
FAIRNESS IN GAMES: A STUDY ON CHILDREN’S AND ADULTS’ UNDERSTANDING OF PROBABILITY
This study aims to analyse the reasoning that children and adults with the same school level use to assess and justify the fairness of games, considering aspects of probability such as randomness, sample space, and comparison of probabilities. Data collection included a Piagetian clinical interview based on games of chance. The results showed that the participants’ judgments about the fairness of the games depends mainly on the understanding about independence of events, analysis of the sample space, and perception of proportionality when comparing probabilities, and that they have misunderstandings about these ideas. The similar low performance of adults and children on probabilistic reasoning, indicates that the maturity and experience of these adults were not enough to properly develop probabilistic reasoning and to instrumentalize it to assess the fairness of a game consistently. Thus, teaching interventions to expand and consolidate students' learning in the field of probability are recommended and the activities presented in this study may serve as a basis for such interventions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Statistics Education Research Journal
Statistics Education Research Journal Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: SERJ is a peer-reviewed electronic journal of the International Association for Statistical Education (IASE) and the International Statistical Institute (ISI). SERJ is published twice a year and is free. SERJ aims to advance research-based knowledge that can help to improve the teaching, learning, and understanding of statistics or probability at all educational levels and in both formal (classroom-based) and informal (out-of-classroom) contexts. Such research may examine, for example, cognitive, motivational, attitudinal, curricular, teaching-related, technology-related, organizational, or societal factors and processes that are related to the development and understanding of stochastic knowledge. In addition, research may focus on how people use or apply statistical and probabilistic information and ideas, broadly viewed. The Journal encourages the submission of quality papers related to the above goals, such as reports of original research (both quantitative and qualitative), integrative and critical reviews of research literature, analyses of research-based theoretical and methodological models, and other types of papers described in full in the Guidelines for Authors. All papers are reviewed internally by an Associate Editor or Editor, and are blind-reviewed by at least two external referees. Contributions in English are recommended. Contributions in French and Spanish will also be considered. A submitted paper must not have been published before or be under consideration for publication elsewhere.
期刊最新文献
TEACHING AND LEARNING TO CONSTRUCT DATA-BASED DECISION TREES USING DATA CARDS AS THE FIRST INTRODUCTION TO MACHINE LEARNING IN MIDDLE SCHOOL EXAMINING THE ROLE OF CONTEXT IN STATISTICAL LITERACY OUTCOMES USING AN ISOMORPHIC ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENT BRAZILIAN RESEARCH IN STATISTICS, PROBABILITY AND COMBINATORICS EDUCATION: A LOOK AT THESES RESOURCES AND TENSIONS IN STUDENT THINKING ABOUT STATISTICAL DESIGN OPPORTUNITIES TO LEARN MEAN, MEDIAN, AND MODE AFFORDED BY TEXTBOOK TASKS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1