The study presented in this paper is part of a wide research project concerning indirect proofs. Starting from the notion of mathematical theorem as the unity of a statement, a proof and a theory, a structural analysis of indirect proofs has been carried out. Such analysis leads to the production of a model to be used in the observation, analysis and interpretation of cognitive and didactical issues related to indirect proofs and indirect argumentations. Through the analysis of exemplar protocols, the paper discusses cognitive processes, outlining cognitive and didactical aspects of students’ difficulties with this way of proving.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Valerio and Cristina do not belong to the same class, although they belong to the same school.
Antonini, S. (2001). Negation in mathematics: obstacles emerging from an exploratory study. In M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 25th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 2, pp. 49–56). The Netherlands: Utrecht.
Antonini, S. (2003a). Dimostrare per assurdo: analisi cognitiva in una prospettiva didattica. Tesi di Dottorato, Dipartimento di Matematica, Università di Pisa.
Antonini, S. (2003b). Non-examples and proof by contradiction. In N. A. Pateman, B. J. Dougherty, & J. Zilliox (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2003 Joint Meeting of PME and PMENA (Vol. 2, pp. 49–55). Honolulu.
Antonini, S. (2004). A statement, the contrapositive and the inverse: intuition and argumentation. In M. Johnsen Høines, & A. Berit Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 47–54). Norway: Bergen.
Antonini, S., & Mariotti, M. A. (2007). Indirect proof: an interpreting model. In D. Pitta-Pantazi, & G. Philippou (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 541–550). Cyprus: Larnaca.
Balacheff, N. (1991). Treatment of refutations: aspects of the complexity of a contructivist approach to mathematics learning. In E. von Glasersfeld (Ed.), Radical Constructivism in Mathematics Education (pp. 89–110). The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Barbin, E. (1988). La démonstration mathématique: significations épistémologiques et questions didactiques. Bulletin APMEP, 366, 591–620.
Bernardi, C. (2002). Ricerche in Didattica della Matematica e in Matematiche Elementari. Bollettino Unione Matematica Italiana, Serie VIII, V-A, 193–213.
Bellissima, F., & Pagli, P. (1993). La verità trasmessa. La logica attraverso le dimostrazioni matematiche. Firenze: Sansoni.
Dummett, M. (1977). Elements of Intuitionism. New York: Oxford University Press.
Durand-Guerrier, V. (2003). Which notion of implication is the right one? From logical considerations to a didactic perspective. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 53(1), 5–34.
Duval, R. (1992–93). Argumenter, demontrer, expliquer: coninuité ou rupture cognitive? Petit x, 31, 37–61.
Duval, R. (1995). Sémiosis et Pensée Humain. Bern: Peter Lang.
Fischbein, E. (1987). Intuition in science and mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Freudenthal, H. (1973). Mathematics as an educational task. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Garuti, R., Boero, P., & Lemut, E. (1998). Cognitive Unity of Theorems and Difficulties of Proof. In A. Olivier, & K. Newstead (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 345–352). Stellenbosch: South Africa.
Harel, G. (2007). Students’ proof schemes revisited. In P. Boero (Eds.), Theorems in school: from history, epistemology and cognition to classroom practice (pp. 65–78). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Leron, U. (1985). A Direct approach to indirect proofs. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 16(3), 321–325.
Mancosu, P. (1996). Philosophy of mathematical practice in the 17th century. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mariotti, M. A., Bartolini Bussi, M., Boero, P., Ferri, F., & Garuti, R. (1997). Approaching geometry theorems in contexts: from history and epistemology to cognition. In E. Pehkonen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 21th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 180–195). Finland: Lathi.
Mariotti, M. A., & Antonini, S. (2006). Reasoning in an absurd world: difficulties with proof by contradiction. In J. Novotnà, H. Moarovà, M. Kràtkà & N. Stelìchovà (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 65–72). Prague, Czech Republic.
Pedemonte, B. (2002). Etude didactique et cognitive des rapports de l’argumentation et de la démonstration dans l’apprentissage des mathématiques. Thèse, Université Joseph Fourier, Grenoble.
Pedemonte, B. (2007). How can the relationship between argumentation and proof be analysed? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66(1), 23–41.
Piaget, J. (1974). Recherches sur la contradiction. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Polya, G. (1945). How to solve it. Princeton University Press.
Prawitz, D. (1971). Ideas and results in proof theory. In J.E. Fenstad (Eds.), Proceedings of the second Scandinavian Logic Symposium (pp. 235–307). Amsterdam.
Reid, D., & Dobbin, J. (1998). Why is proof by contradiction difficult? In A. Olivier & K. Newstead (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 41–48). Stellenbosch, South Africa.
Stylianides, A. J., Stylianides, G. J., & Philippou, G. N. (2004). Undergraduate students’ understanding of the contraposition equivalence rule in symbolic and verbal contexts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 55(1–3), 133–162.
Szabó, A. (1978). The beginnings of Greek mathematics. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Thompson, D. R. (1996). Learning and teaching indirect proof. The Mathematics Teacher, 89(6), 474–82.
Wu Yu, J., Lin, F., & Lee, Y. (2003). Students’ understanding of proof by contradiction. In N.A. Pateman, B.J. Dougherty, & J. Zilliox (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2003 Joint Meeting of PME and PMENA (Vol. 4, pp. 443–449). Honolulu.
This research study was supported by the Italian Ministry of Education and Research (MIUR) Prin 2005 # 2005019721.
About this article
Cite this article
Antonini, S., Mariotti, M.A. Indirect proof: what is specific to this way of proving?. ZDM Mathematics Education 40, 401–412 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-008-0091-2
- Indirect proof
- Proof by contradiction
- Proof by contraposition