The natural number bias and magnitude representation in fraction comparison by expert mathematicians

195 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Student Teachers’ and Experienced Teachers’ Professional Vision of Students’ Understanding of the Rational Number Concept (2020, unknown): “Automatic activation of natural number knowledge in rational number tasks (natural number bias) happens for practically everybody (Obersteiner et al. 2013), and avoiding misconceptions and errors requires quick inhibition (Vosniadou et al. 2018).”
Variability in the natural number bias: Who, when, how, and why (2015, background): “For example, the strategy choices of the expert mathematicians studied by Obersteiner et al. (2013) could be summarized as follows: (1) if the fractions to be compared have common numerators or common denominators, then compare natural number parts that differ and report the result; (2) if the…”
Spontaneous Focusing on Quantitative Relations in the Development of Children's Fraction Knowledge (2014, methodology): “Similar procedures were followed as in Study 1 for the collection of SFOR measures and other mathematical skills in first grade (see also McMullen et al., 2013).”
Inhibiting natural knowledge in fourth graders: towards a comprehensive test instrument (2015, methodology): “Moreover, numerous studies that use reaction time data to investigate the natural number bias suggest that inhibition needs to take place in order to respond correctly to incongruent items (e.g., Obersteiner et al. 2013).”