Learning to Understand the Balance Beam
- 1 March 1986
- journal article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Cognition and Instruction
- Vol. 3 (1) , 63-86
- https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0301_3
Abstract
Twenty-two university students who did not initially know the quantitative rule for predicting whether a configuration of weights placed on a balance beam would cause the beam to balance, tip left, or tip right were asked to induce the rule in a training procedure adapted from Siegler (1976). For each of a series of balance beam problems, subjects predicted the action of the beam and explained how they arrived at their prediction. Protocols revealed that although all subjects realized on early on that both weight and distance were relevant to their predictions, they used a variety of heuristics prior to inducing the correct quantitative rule. These heuristics included instance-based reasoning, qualitative estimation of distance, and the use of quantitative rules of limited generality. The common use of instance-based reasoning suggests that learning to understand the balance beam cannot be described completely in terms of a simple rule acquisition theory. Also, the variability in the use of heuristics across subjects suggests that no simple theory that depicts subjects as linearly progressing through a hierarchy of levels can be adequately describe the development of balance understanding.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Discrimination of operator schemata in problem solving: Learning from examplesCognitive Psychology, 1985
- Usefulness of a balance model in understanding the mean.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1984
- Judgment under UncertaintyPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,1982
- Concept or computation: Students' understanding of the meanEducational Studies in Mathematics, 1981
- Data-driven discovery of physical lawsCognitive Science, 1981
- Understanding Understanding MathematicsCognitive Science, 1978
- Implicit learning of synthetic languages: The role of instructional set.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1976
- THE GROWTH OF LOGICAL THINKING IN NORMAL AND SUBNORMAL CHILRENBritish Journal of Educational Psychology, 1965
- A FOLLOW‐UP STUDY OF INHELDER AND PIAGET'S THE GROWTH OF LOGICAL THINKINGBritish Journal of Psychology, 1961
- The growth of logical thinking: From childhood to adolescence.Published by American Psychological Association (APA) ,1958