Abstract
As part of a study on the natural interpretations of probability, experiments about elementary “purely random” situations (with dice or poker chips) were carried out using students of various backgrounds in the theory of probability. A prior study on cognitive models which analyzed the individual data of more than 600 subjects has shown that the most frequent model used is based on the following incorrect argument: the results to compare are equiprobable because it's a matter of chance; thus, random events are thought to be equiprobable “by nature”. The present paper is divided into two parts. In the first, the findings of a series of experiments are summarized. In the second, the following two hypotheses are tested: (1) Despite their incorrect model, subjects are able to find the correct response. (2) They are more likely to do so when the “chance” aspect of the situation has been masked. An experiment testing 87 students showed, as expected, that there is a way to induce the utilization of an appropriate cognitive model. However, the transfer of this model to a classical random situation is not as frequent as one might expect.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bernard, J.-M.: 1991, “Inférence bayésienne et prédictive sur les fréquences”. In H. Rouanet, M.-P. Lecoutre, M.-C. Bert, B. Lecoutre, and J.-M. Bernard (eds.), L'Inférence Statistique dans la Démarche du Chercheur, Peter Lang, Bern, pp. 121–153.
de Finetti, B.: 1974, Theory of Probability (two volumes), Wiley, New York.
Durand, J.-L.: 1989, Jugements Probabilistes dans une Situation Aléatoire: Etude Expérimentale de leur Stabilité, unpublished doctoral thesis, Paris V.
Escarabajal, M.-C. and Richard, J.-F.: 1986, “Le transfert analogique de procédures dans l'interprétation et al résolution de problèmes d'inclusion de classes chez des adultes”, Archives de Psychologie 54, 39–64.
Feyerabend, P.: 1975, Against Method, New York Books, London.
Fischbein, E.: 1987, Intuition in Science and Mathematics: An Educational Approach, D. Reidel, Cambridge.
Fischbein, E., Barbat, I. and Minzat, I.: 1971, “Intuitions primaires et intuitions secondaires dans l'initiation aux probabilités”, Educational Studies in Mathematics 4, 264–280.
Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., and Tversky, A.: 1982, Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, Cambridge University Press, New York.
Keren, G.: 1984, “On the importance of identifying the correct ‘problem space’”, Cognition 16, 121–128.
Lecoutre, M.-P.: 1984, “Jugements probabilistes chez des adultes: pratique des jeux de hasard et formation en théorie des probabilités”, Bulletin de Psychologie 38, 891–899.
Lecoutre, M.-P.: 1985, “Effet d'informations de nature combinatoire et de nature fréquentielle sur les jugements probabilistes”, Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques 6, 193–213.
Lecoutre, M.-P., and Cordier, J.: 1990a, “Réponses et bonnes formes”, Groupe Mathématiques et Psychologie, technical report, Paris V.
Lecoutre, M.-P., and Cordier, J.: 1990b, “Effet du mode de présentation d'un problème aléatoire sur les modèles développés par les élèves”, Bulletin de l'A.P.M.E.P. 372, 9–22.
Lecoutre, M.-P., and Durand, J.-L.: 1988, “Jugements probabilistes et modèles cognitifs: étude d'une situation aléatoire”, Educational Studies in Mathematics 19, 357–368.
Lecoutre, M.-P., Durand, J.-L., and Cordier, J.: 1990, “A study of two biases in probabilistic judgments: Representativeness and equiprobability”, in J.-P. Caverni, J.-M. Fabre and M. Gonzalès (eds.), Cognitive Biases, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., North Holland, pp. 563–575.
Lecoutre, M.-P., and Lecoutre, B.: 1979, Enseignement Programmé sur l'Utilisation d'une Table de la Distribution Normale, C.D.U.-S.E.D.E.S., Paris.
Maury, S.: 1984, “La quantification des probabilités: analyse des arguments utilisés par les élèves de classe de seconde”, Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques 6, 198–213.
Maury, S.: 1985, “Influence de la question dans une épreuve relative à la notion d'indépendance”, Educational Studies in Mathematics 16, 283–301.
Nisbett, R., and Ross, L.: 1981, Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgments, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall.
Newell, A., and Simon, H.A.: 1972, Human Problem Solving, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall.
Poitevineau, J., and Bernard, J.-M.: 1986, “La série des programmes IBF”, Informatique et Sciences Humaines 68–69, 135–137.
Richard, J.-F.: 1984, “Mechanisms of problem solving behavior”, In G. D'Ydevalle (ed.), Cognition, Information Processing and Motivation, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 425–444.
Rouanet, H., LeRoux, B., and Bert, M.-C.: 1987, Statistiques en Sciences Humaines: Procédures Naturelles, Dunod, Paris.
Rouanet, H., Bemard, J.-M., and LeRoux, B.: 1990, Statistiques en Sciences Humaines: Analyse Inductive des Données, Dunod, Paris.
Zaleska, M.: 1974, Influence du mode de présentation des séries aléatoires sur le choix d'une stratégie. 1-Situations hypothétiques, Année Psychologique 74, 125–144.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lecoutre, MP. Cognitive models and problem spaces in “purely random” situations. Educ Stud Math 23, 557–568 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00540060
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00540060