Advertisement

Reading Proofs for Validation and Comprehension: an Expert-Novice Eye-Movement Study

  • Anja PanseEmail author
  • Lara Alcock
  • Matthew Inglis
Article

Abstract

Does reading a mathematical proof for validation engender different behaviors from reading it for comprehension? Experts and novices each read two mathematical proofs under different sets of instructions: they were asked to understand one proof, and to assess the validity of the other. Their eye movements were recorded while they read and were analyzed to investigate possible differences in attention allocation, in cognitive demand and in the mathematical reading process. We found negligible differences in reading behaviors under the two sets of instructions, and we discuss the implications of this for theoretical development, research methodology and pedagogical practice.

Keywords

Mathematical texts Reading behavior Proof validation Undergraduate mathematics Experimental methods 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2000). Making believe: The collective construction of public mathematical knowledge in the elementary classroom. In D. Phillips (Ed.), Yearbook of the National Society for the study of education, constructivism in education (pp. 193–224). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bax, S. (2013). The cognitive processing of candidates during reading tests: Evidence from eye-tracking. Language Testing, 30, 441–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown, S. A. (2014). On skepticism and its role in the development of proof in the classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 86, 311–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Conradie, J., & Frith, J. (2000). Comprehension tests in mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 42, 225–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cowen, C. (1991). Teaching and testing mathematics reading. American Mathematical Monthly, 98, 50–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dienes, Z. (2016). How Bayes factors change scientific practice. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 72, 78–89.Google Scholar
  7. Hayward, C. N., Kogan, M., & Laursen, S. L. (2016). Facilitating instructor adoption of inquiry-based learning in college mathematics. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 2, 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hodds, M., Alcock, L., & Inglis, M. (2014). Self-explanation training improves proof comprehension. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45, 62–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Inglis, M., & Alcock, L. (2012). Expert and novice approaches to reading mathematical proofs. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43, 358–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Inglis, M., Mejía-Ramos, J.-P., Weber, K., & Alcock, L. (2013). On mathematicians’ different standards when evaluating elementary proofs. Topics in Cognitive Science, 5, 270–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jacobson, J. Z., & Dodwell, P. C. (1979). Saccadic eye movements during reading. Brain and Language, 8, 303–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jones, I., & Alcock, L. (2014). Peer assessment without assessment criteria. Studies in Higher Education, 39, 1774–1787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1976). Eye fixations and cognitive processes. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 441–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329–354.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.87.4.329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kasman, R. (2006). Critique that! Analytical writing assignments in advanced mathematics courses. Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 16, 1–15.Google Scholar
  16. Knuth, E. (2002). Secondary school mathematics teachers’ conceptions of proof. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33, 379–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Larsen, S., Johnson, E., & Bartlo, J. (2013). Designing and scaling up an innovation in abstract algebra. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 32, 693–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Larvor, B. (2016). Mathematical cultures: The London meetings 2012–2014. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
  19. Lew, K., Fukawa-Connelly, T. P., Mejía-Ramos, J. P., & Weber, K. (2016). Lectures in advanced mathematics: Why students might not understand what the mathematics professor is trying to convey. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 47, 162–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mejía-Ramos, J. P. & Inglis, M. (2009). Argumentative and proving activities in mathematics education research. In F.-L. Lin, F.-J. Hsieh, G. Hanna & M. de Villiers (Eds.), Proceedings of the ICMI study 19 conference: Proof and proving in mathematics education (Vol. 2, pp. 88–93), Taipei, Taiwan.Google Scholar
  21. Mejía-Ramos, J.-P., Fuller, E., Weber, K., Rhoads, K., & Samkoff, A. (2012). An assessment model for proof comprehension in undergraduate mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79, 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mejía-Ramos, J. P., Lew, K., de la Torre, J., & Weber, K. (2017). Developing and validating proof comprehension tests in undergraduate mathematics. Research in Mathematics Education, 19, 130–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mello-Thoms, C., Nodine, C. F., & Kundel, H. L. (2004). What attracts the eye to the location of missed and reported breast cancers? In Proceedings of the eye tracking research and applications symposium 2002 (pp. 111–117). NY: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  24. Morey, R. D., Romeijn, J.-W., & Rouder, J. N. (2016). The philosophy of Bayes factors and the quantification of statistical evidence. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 72, 6–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston: Author.Google Scholar
  26. Obersteiner, A., & Tumpek, C. (2016). Measuring fraction comparison strategies with eye-tracking. ZDM Mathematics Education, 48, 255–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pomplun, M., & Sunkara, S. (2003). Pupil dilation as an indicator of cognitive workload in Human-Computer Interaction. In Proceedings of HCI International 2003 (Vol. 3, pp. 542–546). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  28. Rasmussen, C., Wawro, M., & Zandieh, M. (2015). Examining individual and collective level mathematical progress. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 88, 259–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rav, Y. (1999). Why do we prove theorems? Philosophia Mathematica, 7, 5–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1457–1506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1981). Eye movement control during reading: Evidence for direct control. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 33(4), 351–373.Google Scholar
  32. Rouder, J. N., Morey, R. D., Verhagen, J., Swagman, A. R., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2017). Bayesian analysis of factorial designs. Psychological Methods, 22(2), 304–321.  https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Roy, S., Alcock, L., & Inglis, M. (2017). Multimedia resources designed to support learning from written proofs: An eye-movement study. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 96, 249–266.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9754-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Russo, J. E., Johnson, E. J., & Stephens, D. L. (1989). The validity of verbal protocols. Memory and Cognition, 17, 759–769.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Scheid, H. (2002). Elemente der Arithmetik und Algebra. Heidelberg, Berlin, Spektrum, Akad. Verl., 4. Auflage.Google Scholar
  36. Selden, J., & Selden, A. (1995). Unpacking the logic of mathematical statements. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 29, 123–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Selden, A., & Selden, J. (2003). Validations of proofs considered as texts: Can undergraduates tell whether an argument proves a theorem? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34, 4–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Shepherd, M. D., & van de Sande, C. C. (2014). Reading mathematics for understanding—From novice to expert. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 35, 74–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shepherd, M. D., Selden, A., & Selden, J. (2012). University students’ reading of their first-year mathematics textbooks. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 14, 226–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sibert, J. L., Gokturk, M., & Lavine, R. A. (2000). The reading assistant: Eye gaze triggered auditory prompting for reading remediation. In Proceedings of the thirteenth annual ACM symposium on user Interface software and technology (pp. 101–107). NY: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  41. Stylianides, A. J. (2007). Proof and proving in school mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 289–321.Google Scholar
  42. Stylianides, A. J., Bieda, K. N., & Morselli, F. (2016). Proof and argumentation in mathematics education research. In Á. Gutiérrez, G. C. Leder, & P. Boero (Eds.), The second handbook of research on the psychology of mathematics education: The journey continues (pp. 315–351). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Thurston, W. P. (1994). On proof and progress in mathematics. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 30, 161–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tobii Technology. (2010). Tobii eye tracking: An introduction to eye tracking and Tobii eye trackers. Stockholm: Tobii Technology AP.Google Scholar
  45. Wagenmakers, E. J., Love, J., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Ly, A., Verhagen, J., … & Meerhoff, F. (2018). Bayesian inference for psychology. Part II: Example applications with JASP. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25, 58–76.Google Scholar
  46. Was, C., Sansosti, F., & Morris, B. (2017). Eye-tracking technology applications in educational research. Hershey: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Weber, K. (2009). Mathematics majors’ evaluation of mathematical arguments and their conception of proof. In Proceedings of the Twelfth SIGMAA on RUME Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, http://mathed.asu.edu/crume2009/proceedings.html.
  48. Weber, K. (2010). Mathematics majors’ perceptions of conviction, validity and proof. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 12, 306–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Weber, K., Inglis, M., & Mejía-Ramos, J. P. (2014). How mathematicians obtain conviction: Implications for mathematics instruction and research on epistemic cognition. Educational Psychologist, 49, 36–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Weinberg, A., Wiesner, E., Benesh, B., & Boester, T. (2012). Undergraduate students’ self-reported use of mathematics textbooks. Primus , 22, 152–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 458–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Yackel, E., Rasmussen, C., & King, K. (2000). Social and sociomathematical norms in an advanced undergraduate mathematics course. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19, 275–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Yang, K.-L., & Lin, F.-L. (2008). A model of reading comprehension of geometry proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67, 59–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institut für MathematikUniversität PaderbornPaderbornGermany
  2. 2.Mathematics Education CentreLoughborough UniversityLoughboroughUK

Personalised recommendations