Dixon J A, Deets J K, Bangert A
Department of Psychology, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia 23187-8795, USA.
Mem Cognit. 2001 Apr;29(3):462-77. doi: 10.3758/bf03196397.
Current theories of mathematical problem solving propose that people select a mathematical operation as the solution to a problem on the basis of a structure mapping between their problem representation and the representation of the mathematical operations. The structure-mapping hypothesis requires that the problem and the mathematical representations contain analogous relations. Past research has demonstrated that the problem representation consists of functional relationships, or principles. The present study tested whether people represent analogous principles for each arithmetic operation (i.e., addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division). For each operation, college (Experiments 1 and 2) and 8th grade (Experiment 2) participants were asked to rate the degree to which a set of completed problems was a good attempt at the operation. The pattern of presented answers either violated one of four principles or did not violate any principles. The distance of the presented answers from the correct answers was independently manipulated. Consistent with the hypothesis that people represent the principles, (1) violations of the principles were rated as poorer attempts at the operation, (2) operations that are learned first (e.g., addition) had more extensive principle representations than did operations learned later (multiplication), and (3) principles that are more frequently in evidence developed more quickly. In Experiment 3, college participants rated the degree to which statements were indicative of each operation. The statements were either consistent or inconsistent with one of two principles. The participants' ratings showed that operations with longer developmental histories had strong principle representations. The implications for a structure-mapping approach to mathematical problem solving are discussed.
当前的数学问题解决理论认为,人们基于问题表征与数学运算表征之间的结构映射来选择一种数学运算作为问题的解决方案。结构映射假设要求问题和数学表征包含类似的关系。过去的研究表明,问题表征由函数关系或原理组成。本研究测试了人们是否为每种算术运算(即加法、减法、乘法和除法)表征类似的原理。对于每种运算,大学生(实验1和实验2)和八年级学生(实验2)被要求对一组已完成问题在该运算上的尝试程度进行评分。呈现答案的模式要么违反了四条原理之一,要么没有违反任何原理。呈现答案与正确答案的距离是独立操纵的。与人们表征原理的假设一致的是:(1)违反原理的答案被评为在该运算上较差的尝试;(2)先学习的运算(如加法)比后学习的运算(乘法)有更广泛的原理表征;(3)更频繁出现的原理发展得更快。在实验3中,大学生对陈述表明每种运算的程度进行评分。这些陈述要么与两条原理之一一致,要么不一致。参与者的评分表明,具有较长发展历史的运算有很强的原理表征。本文讨论了结构映射方法对数学问题解决的启示。