Michael D’Erchie , Johannes Rosenkranz , Sabrina Schwarzmeier , Thomas Dresler , Andreas Obersteiner
{"title":"基于数量级的推理可以在比较分数时减少自然数偏差:一项干预研究","authors":"Michael D’Erchie , Johannes Rosenkranz , Sabrina Schwarzmeier , Thomas Dresler , Andreas Obersteiner","doi":"10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>When comparing fractions, students often focus on the natural number components rather than on the fractions’ numerical values (e.g., they reason that 2/4 > 1/2 because 2 > 1 and 4 > 2). This phenomenon is known as <em>natural number bias</em>. To date, there has been little research on ways to reduce this bias.</div></div><div><h3>Aims</h3><div>We investigated whether an increased ability to reason about fraction magnitude can improve students’ accuracy and reduce the natural number bias when comparing fractions.</div></div><div><h3>Sample</h3><div>Participants were 225 sixth-grade students from German academic-track secondary schools.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We used a three-arm randomized pretest-posttest intervention design. For six weeks (18 sessions), the intervention group received computer-based training linking visual representations to symbolic fractions to activate fraction magnitude. One control group used a different tool for fraction learning that did not focus on fraction magnitude, while the other control group received no training.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>On average, students in the intervention group improved their fraction comparison accuracy by 15% (control groups: 3% and 6%, respectively). Pretest and posttest results revealed interindividual differences in accuracy for fraction pairs congruent or incongruent with naïve natural number-based reasoning. In the intervention group, 74% of students who showed a typical natural number bias at pretest no longer showed it at posttest, a higher percentage than for both control groups (15% and 22%, respectively).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Students’ increased ability to reason about fraction magnitude reduced the natural number bias, challenging previous research that the bias is persistent. The findings contribute to discussions about effective ways to reduce biased reasoning in mathematics.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48357,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Instruction","volume":"98 ","pages":"Article 102109"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Magnitude-based reasoning can reduce the natural number bias when comparing fractions: An intervention study\",\"authors\":\"Michael D’Erchie , Johannes Rosenkranz , Sabrina Schwarzmeier , Thomas Dresler , Andreas Obersteiner\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>When comparing fractions, students often focus on the natural number components rather than on the fractions’ numerical values (e.g., they reason that 2/4 > 1/2 because 2 > 1 and 4 > 2). This phenomenon is known as <em>natural number bias</em>. To date, there has been little research on ways to reduce this bias.</div></div><div><h3>Aims</h3><div>We investigated whether an increased ability to reason about fraction magnitude can improve students’ accuracy and reduce the natural number bias when comparing fractions.</div></div><div><h3>Sample</h3><div>Participants were 225 sixth-grade students from German academic-track secondary schools.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We used a three-arm randomized pretest-posttest intervention design. For six weeks (18 sessions), the intervention group received computer-based training linking visual representations to symbolic fractions to activate fraction magnitude. One control group used a different tool for fraction learning that did not focus on fraction magnitude, while the other control group received no training.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>On average, students in the intervention group improved their fraction comparison accuracy by 15% (control groups: 3% and 6%, respectively). Pretest and posttest results revealed interindividual differences in accuracy for fraction pairs congruent or incongruent with naïve natural number-based reasoning. In the intervention group, 74% of students who showed a typical natural number bias at pretest no longer showed it at posttest, a higher percentage than for both control groups (15% and 22%, respectively).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Students’ increased ability to reason about fraction magnitude reduced the natural number bias, challenging previous research that the bias is persistent. The findings contribute to discussions about effective ways to reduce biased reasoning in mathematics.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48357,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Learning and Instruction\",\"volume\":\"98 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102109\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Learning and Instruction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475225000337\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475225000337","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Magnitude-based reasoning can reduce the natural number bias when comparing fractions: An intervention study
Background
When comparing fractions, students often focus on the natural number components rather than on the fractions’ numerical values (e.g., they reason that 2/4 > 1/2 because 2 > 1 and 4 > 2). This phenomenon is known as natural number bias. To date, there has been little research on ways to reduce this bias.
Aims
We investigated whether an increased ability to reason about fraction magnitude can improve students’ accuracy and reduce the natural number bias when comparing fractions.
Sample
Participants were 225 sixth-grade students from German academic-track secondary schools.
Methods
We used a three-arm randomized pretest-posttest intervention design. For six weeks (18 sessions), the intervention group received computer-based training linking visual representations to symbolic fractions to activate fraction magnitude. One control group used a different tool for fraction learning that did not focus on fraction magnitude, while the other control group received no training.
Results
On average, students in the intervention group improved their fraction comparison accuracy by 15% (control groups: 3% and 6%, respectively). Pretest and posttest results revealed interindividual differences in accuracy for fraction pairs congruent or incongruent with naïve natural number-based reasoning. In the intervention group, 74% of students who showed a typical natural number bias at pretest no longer showed it at posttest, a higher percentage than for both control groups (15% and 22%, respectively).
Conclusions
Students’ increased ability to reason about fraction magnitude reduced the natural number bias, challenging previous research that the bias is persistent. The findings contribute to discussions about effective ways to reduce biased reasoning in mathematics.
期刊介绍:
As an international, multi-disciplinary, peer-refereed journal, Learning and Instruction provides a platform for the publication of the most advanced scientific research in the areas of learning, development, instruction and teaching. The journal welcomes original empirical investigations. The papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and different methodological approaches. They may refer to any age level, from infants to adults and to a diversity of learning and instructional settings, from laboratory experiments to field studies. The major criteria in the review and the selection process concern the significance of the contribution to the area of learning and instruction, and the rigor of the study.