Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38816630›Full record

ReviewCognitive research: principles and implications2024

How do students reason about statistical sampling with computer simulations? An integrative review from a grounded cognition perspective.

Sebahat Gok, Robert L Goldstone

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sebahat GokProgram in Cognitive Science, Indiana University, 1101 E. 10th Street, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA. sebahgok@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-5057-4668
Robert L GoldstoneProgram in Cognitive Science, Indiana University, 1101 E. 10th Street, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8357-8358

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interactive computer simulations are commonly used as pedagogical tools to support students' statistical reasoning. This paper examines whether and how these simulations enable their intended effects. We begin by contrasting two theoretical frameworks-dual processes and grounded cognition-in the context of people's conceptions about statistical sampling, setting the stage for the potential benefits of simulations in learning such conceptions. Then, we continue with reviewing the educational literature on statistical sampling simulations. Our review tentatively suggests benefits of the simulations for building statistical habits of mind. However, challenges seem to persist when more specific concepts and skills are investigated. With and without simulations, students have difficulty forming an aggregate view of data, interpreting sampling distributions, showing a process-based understanding of the law of large numbers, making statistical inferences, and context-independent reasoning. We propose that grounded cognition offers a framework for understanding these findings, highlighting the bidirectional relationship between perception and conception, perceptual design features, and guided perceptual routines for supporting students' meaning making from simulations. Finally, we propose testable instructional strategies for using simulations in statistics education.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationCognitionHumansStudentsThinkingDual-process theoriesGrounded cognitionPerceptual learningStatistical samplingStatistics simulations

Identifiers

PMID38816630
PMCPMC11139845

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.