探究定量推理能力与新闻习惯的关系

Q3 Mathematics
Bennett Attaway, John Voiklis, Jena Barchas-Lichtenstein, Eric Hochberg, Jim Hammerman, U. Thomas, Nicole LaMarca, Laura Santhanam, Patti Parson
{"title":"探究定量推理能力与新闻习惯的关系","authors":"Bennett Attaway, John Voiklis, Jena Barchas-Lichtenstein, Eric Hochberg, Jim Hammerman, U. Thomas, Nicole LaMarca, Laura Santhanam, Patti Parson","doi":"10.5038/1936-4660.16.1.1430","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Because people are constantly confronted with numbers and mathematical concepts in the news, we have embarked on a project to create journalism that can support news users’ number skills. But doing so requires understanding (1) journalists’ ability to reason with numbers, (2) other adults’ ability to do so, and (3) the attributes and affordances of news. In this paper, we focus on the relationship between adults’ news habits and their quantitative reasoning skills. We collected data from a sample of 1,200 US adults, testing their ability to interpret statistical results and asking them to report their news habits. The assessment we developed differentiated the skills of adults in our sample and conformed to the theoretical and statistical assumption that such skills are normally distributed in the population overall. We also found that respondents could be clustered into six distinct groups on the basis of news repertoires (overall patterns of usage, including frequency of news use overall and choice of news outlets). As often assumed in the literature on quantitative reasoning, these news repertoires predicted quantitative reasoning skills better than the amount of quantification in the outlets, but they still predicted only a small fraction of the variance. These results may suggest that news habits may play a smaller or less direct role in quantitative reasoning than has previously been assumed. We speculate that the presence (or absence) of quantification in everyday activities – namely work and hobbies – may be a better predictor of adults’ quantitative reasoning, as may additional dimensions of news habits and affective responses to numbers.","PeriodicalId":36166,"journal":{"name":"Numeracy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring the Relationship between Quantitative Reasoning Skills and News Habits\",\"authors\":\"Bennett Attaway, John Voiklis, Jena Barchas-Lichtenstein, Eric Hochberg, Jim Hammerman, U. Thomas, Nicole LaMarca, Laura Santhanam, Patti Parson\",\"doi\":\"10.5038/1936-4660.16.1.1430\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Because people are constantly confronted with numbers and mathematical concepts in the news, we have embarked on a project to create journalism that can support news users’ number skills. But doing so requires understanding (1) journalists’ ability to reason with numbers, (2) other adults’ ability to do so, and (3) the attributes and affordances of news. In this paper, we focus on the relationship between adults’ news habits and their quantitative reasoning skills. We collected data from a sample of 1,200 US adults, testing their ability to interpret statistical results and asking them to report their news habits. The assessment we developed differentiated the skills of adults in our sample and conformed to the theoretical and statistical assumption that such skills are normally distributed in the population overall. We also found that respondents could be clustered into six distinct groups on the basis of news repertoires (overall patterns of usage, including frequency of news use overall and choice of news outlets). As often assumed in the literature on quantitative reasoning, these news repertoires predicted quantitative reasoning skills better than the amount of quantification in the outlets, but they still predicted only a small fraction of the variance. These results may suggest that news habits may play a smaller or less direct role in quantitative reasoning than has previously been assumed. We speculate that the presence (or absence) of quantification in everyday activities – namely work and hobbies – may be a better predictor of adults’ quantitative reasoning, as may additional dimensions of news habits and affective responses to numbers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Numeracy\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Numeracy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5038/1936-4660.16.1.1430\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Mathematics\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Numeracy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5038/1936-4660.16.1.1430","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Mathematics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

因为人们经常在新闻中遇到数字和数学概念,我们已经开始了一个项目,创造新闻,可以支持新闻用户的数字技能。但这样做需要理解(1)记者用数字推理的能力,(2)其他成年人这样做的能力,以及(3)新闻的属性和启示。在本文中,我们关注的是成年人的新闻习惯和他们的定量推理能力之间的关系。我们从1200名美国成年人的样本中收集数据,测试他们解释统计结果的能力,并要求他们报告自己的新闻习惯。我们开发的评估区分了样本中成年人的技能,并符合理论和统计假设,即这些技能在总体人口中呈正态分布。我们还发现,受访者可以根据新闻曲目(使用的总体模式,包括新闻使用的总体频率和新闻媒体的选择)分为六个不同的组。正如定量推理文献中经常假设的那样,这些新闻库比出口中的量化量更能预测定量推理技能,但它们仍然只能预测方差的一小部分。这些结果可能表明,新闻习惯在定量推理中的作用可能比之前假设的要小或不那么直接。我们推测,日常活动(即工作和爱好)中量化的存在(或不存在)可能更好地预测成年人的定量推理,就像新闻习惯和对数字的情感反应的额外维度一样。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring the Relationship between Quantitative Reasoning Skills and News Habits
Because people are constantly confronted with numbers and mathematical concepts in the news, we have embarked on a project to create journalism that can support news users’ number skills. But doing so requires understanding (1) journalists’ ability to reason with numbers, (2) other adults’ ability to do so, and (3) the attributes and affordances of news. In this paper, we focus on the relationship between adults’ news habits and their quantitative reasoning skills. We collected data from a sample of 1,200 US adults, testing their ability to interpret statistical results and asking them to report their news habits. The assessment we developed differentiated the skills of adults in our sample and conformed to the theoretical and statistical assumption that such skills are normally distributed in the population overall. We also found that respondents could be clustered into six distinct groups on the basis of news repertoires (overall patterns of usage, including frequency of news use overall and choice of news outlets). As often assumed in the literature on quantitative reasoning, these news repertoires predicted quantitative reasoning skills better than the amount of quantification in the outlets, but they still predicted only a small fraction of the variance. These results may suggest that news habits may play a smaller or less direct role in quantitative reasoning than has previously been assumed. We speculate that the presence (or absence) of quantification in everyday activities – namely work and hobbies – may be a better predictor of adults’ quantitative reasoning, as may additional dimensions of news habits and affective responses to numbers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Numeracy
Numeracy Mathematics-Mathematics (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信