The Rationality Debate: Application of Cognitive Psychology to Mathematics Education
By Uri Leron, Orit Hazzan. 2006
110 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Developmental and Educational Psychology, General Decision Sciences
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/60beafdbb4374596946d46702b98b411eed7560e
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Artificial Intelligence
- W. Van Dooren
- Fiona Fidler
- Orit Hazzan
- Uri Leron
- Lieven Verschaffel
- Jenine R. Maeyer
- Xenia Vamvakoussi
- Geoff Cumming
In Developmental and Educational Psychology
- W. Van Dooren
- Lieven Verschaffel
- Jenine R. Maeyer
- Orit Hazzan
- Uri Leron
- V. Talanquer
- Ruth Beyth-Marom
- Xenia Vamvakoussi
In General Decision Sciences
- W. Van Dooren
- Lieven Verschaffel
- Orit Hazzan
- Uri Leron
- Geoff Cumming
- Fiona Fidler
- Jenine R. Maeyer
- V. Talanquer
Citations in the corpus
- Intuitive vs analytical thinking: four perspectives (2009, methodology): “The first application of this theory to mathematics education research, to the best of our knowledge, appears in Leron and Hazzan (2006) ; the present exposition and analysis is an abridged version of the one given in that paper.”
- STATISTICAL COGNITION: TOWARDS EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE IN STATISTICS AND STATISTICS EDUCATION (2008, background): “Leron and Hazzan (2006) demonstrated how dual-process theory and empirical results from heuristic and biases research might shed light on mathematics education.”
- Naturally Biased? In Search for Reaction Time Evidence for a Natural Number Bias in Adults. (2012, background): “…argued that the dual-process theories in cognitive psychology and their accompanying methodologies could be a valuable tool in establishing the intuitive nature of erroneous reasoning in various mathematical domains (Gillard, Van Dooren, Schaeken, & Verschaffel, 2009a; Leron & Hazzan, 2006, 2009).”
- The role of intuitive heuristics in students' thinking: Ranking chemical substances (2010, background): “…completed in nonacademic contexts, there is evidence, particularly from investigations in mathematics’ education (Fischbein, 1987; Gillard, Van Dooren, Schaeken, & Verschaffel, 2009; Leron & Hazzan, 2006; Stavy & Tirosh, 2000), that this mode of thinking is also common in the classroom setting.”