Affordances of Fractions and Decimals for Arithmetic

Autor/inn/en	Liu, Qiushan; Braithwaite, David
Titel	Affordances of Fractions and Decimals for Arithmetic
Quelle	In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 49 (2023) 9, S.1459-1470 (12 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Liu, Qiushan) ORCID (Braithwaite, David)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0278-7393
DOI	10.1037/xlm0001161
Schlagwörter	Fractions; Arithmetic; Mathematical Concepts; Affordances; Problem Solving; Addition; Multiplication; Accuracy; Number Concepts; Undergraduate Students; Florida + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Bruchrechnung; Addition; Arithmetik; Arithmetikunterricht; Rechnen; Problemlösen; Multiplikation; Number concept; Zahlbegriff
Abstract	Rational numbers are represented by multiple notations: fractions, decimals, and percentages. Whereas previous studies have investigated affordances of these notations for representing different types of information (DeWolf et al., 2015; Tian et al., 2020), the present study investigated their affordances for solving different types of arithmetic problems. We hypothesized that decimals afford addition better than fractions do and that fractions afford multiplication better than decimals do. This hypothesis was tested in two experiments with university students (Ns = 77 and 80). When solving fraction and decimal arithmetic problems, participants converted addition problems from fraction to decimal form more than vice versa, and converted multiplication problems from decimal to fraction form more than vice versa, thus revealing preferences favoring decimals for addition and fractions for multiplication. Accuracies paralleled these revealed preferences: Addition accuracy was higher with decimals than fractions, whereas multiplication accuracy was higher with fractions than decimals. Variations in notation preferences as a function of the types of operands involved (e.g., equal vs. unequal denominator fractions) were more consistent with an explanation based on adaptive strategy choice (Siegler, 1996) than with one based on semantic interpretations associated with each notation. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01