Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T05:30:12.342Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Diagrams for difficult problems in probability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2016

Peter C.-H. Cheng  and
Nigel G. Pitt
Peter C.-H. Cheng
Affiliation:
ESRC Centre for Research in Development, Instruction and Training, School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD
Nigel G. Pitt
Affiliation:
ESRC Centre for Research in Development, Instruction and Training, School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

We have developed a novel diagrammatic approach for understanding and teaching probability theory — Probability Space diagrams [1]. Our studies of learning and instruction with Probability Space (PS) diagrams have demonstrated that they can significantly enhance students' conceptual understanding. This article illustrates the utility of PS diagrams by applying them to the explanation of some difficult concepts and notoriously counterintuitive problems in probability. We first outline the nature of the system.

Type
Articles
Information
The Mathematical Gazette , Volume 87 , Issue 508 , March 2003 , pp. 86 - 97
Copyright
Copyright © The Mathematical Association 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Cheng, P. C.-H., Representational analysis and design: What makes an effective representation for learning probability theory? (Technical Report No. 65) ESRC Centre for Research in Development, Instruction & Training (1999).Google Scholar
2. Shaughhessy, J. M., Research in probability and statistics: Reflections and directions, in Grouws, D. A. (ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, Macmillan, New York (1992), pp. 465–494.Google Scholar
3. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. & Tversky, A., Judgement under uncertainty: heuristics and biases, Cambridge University Press (1982).Google Scholar
4. Reinhardt, H. E., Some statistical paradoxes, in Shulte, A. P. & Smart, J. R. (eds.), Teaching Statistics and Probability, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1981), pp. 100–109.Google Scholar
5. Shimojo, S. & Ichikawa, S., Intuitive reasoning about probability: Theoretical and experimental analyses of the ‘problem of the three prisoners’, Cognition 32 (1989), pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
6. Dahlke, R. & Fakler, R., Geometrical probability. In Shulte, A. P. & Smart, J. R. (eds.), Teaching statistics and probability, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1981), pp. 143–153.Google Scholar
7. Konoid, C., Representing probabilities with pipe diagrams, Mathematics Teacher, 89 (May 1996), pp. 378–382.Google Scholar