We contrast our stance on children’s cognitive change and teaching that promotes it with the Cognitively Guided Instruction (CGI) approach (Carpenter, Franke, Jacobs, Fennema, & Empson, 1998). CGI grew out of research on chil- dren’s solutions to addition and subtraction tasks. By asserting that “children’s solution processes directly modeled the action or relationships described in the problem” (Carpenter, Hiebert, & Moser, 1983, p. 55), CGI researchers seemed to equate children’s cognitiveprocesses with tasks. In contrast, we argue for explic- itly distinguishing between task features as adults conceive them and schemes adults can infer on the basis of children’s actions and language when solving tasks. Consider a joint task such as, “We had 7 toys and got 4 more; how many toys we then had in all?” A child may solve such a task by counting-all 1s (1− 2 − 3− 10 −11) , by counting-on (7; 8 − 9 − 10 − 11) , or by using a through- ten strategy (7 + 3 = 10; 10 + 1 = 11) . The latter two indicate the child understands number as a composite unit, hence preparedness for multiplicative reasoning, whereas the first does not (Steffe & von Glasersfeld, 1985). We concur with CGI’s premise of the need to use children’s ways of thinking in teaching. How- ever, we disagree that the structure of a task as seen by an adult determines, inandof itself, the way a child makes sense ofand acts to solve it. The next section presents the conceptual framework that underlies our synthesis.
Reading clinical reports is an activity in which early, fast, online clinical reasoning may be found. All the major text comprehension studies have assumed that readers make online inferences during reading (Graesser, Singer, & Trabasso, 1994; McKoon & Ratcliff, 1992; Van Dijk & Kintsch, 1983; Zwaan & Radvansky, 1998). One of the functions of online inference-making is to maintain the coherence of a text at the global and local levels. Maintaining text coherence occasionally requires the search and discovery of links that connect different portions of the text (Black & Bower, 1980; Kendeou, Smith, & O’Brien, 2012; Schank, 1975; Trabasso & Sperry, 1985; Trabasso & van den Broek, 1985). It has been claimed that processes related to the search for coherence belong to System 1 processes (Kahneman, 2011). This viewpoint has been strongly supported by experiments using the so-called inconsis- tency paradigm in reading comprehension studies (Albrecht & O’Brien, 1993; Long & Chong, 2001; Peracchi & O’Brien, 2004). The results obtained suggest that reading an inconsistent sentence (i.e., a sentence inconsistent with preliminary information in a text) takes longer than reading a consistent or a neutral text. If readers encounter a contextually inconsistent sentence while attempting to maintain text coherence, more time andcognitive resources are needed to resolve the conflict. For example, if a preliminary sentence states that a given client has been previously diagnosed with avoidant personality disorder, and some sentences later, a target sentence states that the person is convinced of being inter- esting, competent, and appealing, the reader may detect an incon- sistency provided he/she possesses the appropriate knowledge. Thus, reading times for an inconsistent target sentence should be longer than for a consistent or neutral one. Consequently, access to previous knowledge and online inference making during reading
Our study can generate empirical evidence to contribute to cooperation literature. It is important for our future as a society to conduct this type of experimental research, since it reveals how people make cooperative decisions and which environments favor or undermine cooperation. The complexity of the study of cooperation requires the contribution of a wide range of disciplines, such as psychology or economics, or a mix of them (new approaches of behavioral economics). Furthermore, most research on cooperation has taken place predominantly in the United States (Yale University and Harvard University) and Germany (Max Planck Institute for Human Development). Some authors suggest that there is some cultural variability in the results of studies on cooperation, affecting elements such as reasoningand perception styles, among others (e.g., Henrich, Heine, & Norenzayan, 2010). Although there are studies of cooperation in our immediate context (Latin America; e.g., Cárdenas & Jaramillo, 2007), they are scarce in comparison to other regions. Thus, this article seeks to contribute to the local development of this topic, facilitating the establishment of new lines of research. Moreover, the fact that manipulating the generation of social norms was not effective in either studies of our research, makes it possible to initiate a discussion about the use of the framework of repeated games for this purpose and to think about new ways to manipulate social norms.
The study highlights interesting distinctions between predictors of sociomoral decision-mak- ing versus predictors of sociomoral maturity. Our results suggest that sociomoral maturity is specifically associated with volitional visual encoding strategies, but not with low-level percep- tive processes such as pre-attentional capture. It offers some support for dual-process models of sociomoral reasoningand the idea that, while sociomoral decision-making may be based on intuition, the production of a justification relies on higher-level processes. Although the dis- tinction between the different aspects of sociomoral reasoning is not complete, the specific association of fixation count and sociomoral maturity is consistent with the idea that socio- moral decision-making and sociomoral maturity, although sharing some common features, are two distinct constructs [89–91]. Using the SoMoral task in the current study possibly high- lights this distinction since participants were first asked about their presumed actions (“What would you do?”), and then were asked to justify (“Why?”), two distinct questions that may involve different cognitiveprocesses. This is consistent with studies reporting that people tend to produce deontological judgments when asked to choose a morally acceptable option (moral judgement) and to make utilitarian decisions when faced with the situation (moral decision- making) [91,92]. This approach is novel because it allows measurement of both questions for each dilemma.
Linearizability is the de facto correctness criterion for reasoning with modern concurrent fine-grained data-structures (Herlihy & Shavit, 2008; Raynal, 2013; Morrison, 2016). More precisely, for each concurrent history of an object, lin- earizability requires that there exists a mapping to a sequential history, such that the ordering of matching call/return pairs is preserved either if they are performed by the same thread, or if they do not overlap. To prove linearizability, one usually has to identify linearization points in programs or object methods, showing that this particular point is the single, atomic, point where the effect of the operation occurs. However, for certain classes complex, highly-scalable and efficient concurrent objects, e. g. (Jayanti, 2005; Dodds et al. , 2015; Morrison & Afek, 2013), proving them to be linearizable is not a straightforwards task: the linearization points of their methods are not fixed by the structure of the programs themselves, but rather depend on intricate interactions with the environment ( i. e. interference). Traditionally, verifying such objects requires a dedicated metatheory (Turon et al. , 2013b; Liang & Feng, 2013; Henzinger et al. , 2013a), e. g. supporting prophecy variables (Abadi & Lamport, 1988), capable ofreasoning
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, re-use of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other way, and storage in data banks. Duplication of this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the German Copyright Law of September 9, 1965, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer-Verlag. Violations are liable for prosecution under the German Copyright Law.
This article described a research was developed as a part of the Master Degree in Education Science Program, with an emphasis on Mathematics Didactics of the “Amazonia” University, Florencia – Colombia conducted from 2012 to 2014. This research contributed to the mathematical competence mobilization Reasoningand Argument (MCRA) and it also associated this competence to mathematical object arithmetic mean study (MOAM), in ninth graders. The conceptual framework is based on the reasoningand argument mathematics competence definition and the mathematical processes according to the PISA study carried out in 2012 and the contextualized mathematical tasks. In that sense, the mathematical tasks were related to coffee harvest daily practices such as fertilization, national production and the global consumption. Due to the nature of the problem, we developed this study by means of a qualitative methodology. We carried out a case study and we also used the participant observation, worksheet, audio and video recordings, interviews, field diary and observation guides as collecting data methods. Through a designed Mathematical Tasks Sequence that was proposed to the students, we could show the mathematical processes that were developed during the students’ mathematical activities and the characterization of dialogic interactions while they were carrying out tasks. Finally, we proposed some final thoughts conclusions with regard to mathematical processes, mathematical tasks, interactions, research and classroom.
Doyle's proposal was a source of inspiration for our work: precompiled knowledge can also be used in ODeLP to prevent the system from building the same argument from scratch several times. The key idea can be resumed as follows. For a ODeLP program P = 〈Ψ , ∆〉 we maintain a repository containing, among other things, every argument that could be built from rules in ∆. Using this repository, we have defined a new optimized version of the inference process. For space reasons we refer the interested reader to  for a complete description about the use of precompiled knowledge in ODeLP.
It is probably easier for children to use their hands rather than words to express how things roll, slide, twist, or stack (Thom et al., 2015). Hence, teaching could be more effective if teachers tried to interpret and capture the meaning of their pupil's gestures. The reason is gestures do not only reflect ideas, but they also modify them. By acting as a bridge that connects action and representation, gestures allow us to learn abstract concepts, such as space and time (Goldin-Meadow, 2015). In their study with pre- schoolers, Ehrlich, Levine, & Goldin-Meadow (2006) found that children who spontaneously gesticulated more while explaining how they solved a mental transformation task performed better on the assignment. Also, they found that boys tended to gesture more and achieved better performance in mental rotation tasks than girls.
Much of the foundational research on QSR is related to RCC that describes two regions by their possible relations to each other. RCC5/RCC8 can be formalized by using first order logic  or by using the 9-intersection model . Conceptually, for any two regions, there are three possibilities: (1) one object is outside the other; this results in the RCC5 relation DR (interiors disjoint) and RCC8 relation DC (disconnected) or EC (externally connected). (2) One object overlaps the other across boundaries; this corresponds to the RCC5/RCC8 relation PO (proper overlap). (3) One object is inside the other; this results in topological relation EQ (equal) or RCC5 relation PP (proper part). To make the relations jointly exhaustive and pairwise distinct (JEPD), there is a converse relation denoted by PPc (proper part converse), PPc(A,B) ≡ PP(B,A). For a close examination, RCC8 decomposes RCC5 relation PP (proper part) into two relations: TPP (tangential proper part) and NTPP (non- tangential Proper part). Similarly for RCC5 relation PPc, RCC8 defines TPPc and NTPPc. The RCC5 and RCC8 relations are pictorially described in Figure 1.
Señala Bonnefon (2013) que la investigación en campos aﬁnes al del razonamiento ha generado abundantes conocimientos útiles para la humanidad. Los estudios sobre toma de decisiones y cognición moral se transﬁeren a diversos contextos aplicados que resultan beneﬁciados por los descubrimientos psicológicos de laboratorio. La investigación sobre razonamiento deductivo, en cambio, se ha ocupado de problemas más básicos que se encuentran alejados de las aplicaciones. Esta ausencia es analizada por Bonnefon (2013) en tres estudios de caso. En primer lugar se ocupa de la revista Psychological Science in the Public Interest editada por la Association for Psychological Science. Durante los últimos 12 años no se ha dedicado ningún volumen monográﬁco a investigaciones sobre razonamiento en esta revista, pero los aportes de toma de decisiones y cognición moral son
The introduction of algebraic reasoningin primary education is a subject of interest for research and curricular innovation in mathematics education, which supposes an extended vision of the nature of school algebra. In this paper we propose a way to conceive of algebraic reasoning based on the types of mathematical objects andprocesses introduced in the onto-semiotic approach to mathematical knowledge. In particular, considering a mathematical practice as algebraic is based on the intervention of generalization and symbolization processes, along with other objects usually considered as algebraic, such as binary relations, operations, functions and structures. This way to conceive of elementary algebra is based on and compared to the characterizations given by other authors. We also propose a typology of algebraic configurations that allows defining degrees of algebrization of mathematical activity.
Early works on complexity for nonmonotonic logics andreasoning systems can be found in , a survey containing results for the most popular approaches. This work elaborates on the tractabil- ity/intractability of default logic, autoepistemic logic, circumscription, closed world reasoningand abduction. It states that notions of higher order complexity must be used in the analysis, since a general property of non-monotonic formalisms is that its computational complexity is higher than the complexity of the underlying monotonic logic. Part of the inherent complexity of these systems can be explained by the fact that their semantic definitions are either based on fix-point constructions or on some form of minimality conditions, and this seems to be a source of high complexity.
Abstract—For qualitative spatial reasoning, there are various dimensions of objects. A considerable amount of effort has been devoted to 2D representation and analysis of spatial relations. Here we present an exposition for 3D objects. There are three types of binary relations between pairs of objects: topological connectivity, cardinal directions, and distance relations. The combinations of these relations can provide additional useful knowledge. The spatial databases include data and the spatial relations to facilitate end-user spatial querying, it also is important to associate natural language with these relations. Some work has been done in this regard for line-region and region-region topological relations in 2D, and very recent work has initiated the association between natural language, topology, and metrics for 3D objects. However, prior efforts have lacked rigorous analysis, expressive power, and completeness of the associated metrics. Herein we present a detailed study of new metrics required to bridge the gap between topological connectivity and size information for integrating reasoningin spatial databases. The complete set of metrics that we present should be useful for a variety of applications dealing with 3D objects including regions with vague boundaries.
Nonetheless, these findings contradict the Krohn para- dox, which assumes that BPD patients have normal or even better mentalizing abilities (Arntz & Haaf, 2012; Fertuck et al., 2009). This paradox could be interpreted from differ- ent points of view. For example, differences in those studies might be associated with assessing different specific sub process in theory of mind, such as the cognitive theory of mind versus recognition of basic emotions. Methodological (e.g., test deployed, different stimulus, the social context of tasks) or even cultural, ethnic, and educational differences. It is also possible that clinic impairment characterizes for increased effects of child abuse or trauma, psychological severity, disease time or co-morbidity.
En el presente trabajo nos proponemos analizar la nueva aproximación al narrativismo que realiza Alasdair MacIntyre en su último libro: Ethics in the Conflicts of Modernity. An Essay on Desire, Practical Reasoningand Narrative (2016). En primer lugar, realizamos un recorrido histórico por las obras más significativas en las que MacIntyre desarrolla su visión del narrativismo en primera instancia: After Virtue. A Study in Moral Theory (1981), Whose Justice, Which Rationality? (1988) y Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry. Enciclopaedia, Genealogy and Tradition (1990). En segundo lugar, intentamos explorar la reincidente problemática de la narratividad en la obra del 2016 para explicar cómo exhibe un agente neoaristotélico la racionalidad y cómo justifica sus juicios a través de una narrativa. Además, exploramos por qué la narrativa cobra más protagonismo en esta obra que la noción de tradición y evidencia una mayor relación con el telos de la vida humana. También, señalamos una reafirmación de la posición macinteryana desde el aristotelismo frente a los ahora denominados expresivistas.
A continuación se dividió el análisis cualitativo en tres fases. Las dos primeras fases fueron realiza- das leyendo las transcripciones en formato Word, y la tercera fase se realizó en el programa Atlas.Ti 6.2. En primer lugar, un equipo de tres psicólogos proce- dió a la selección de las temáticas en cada proceso terapéutico de manera independiente, y luego, las temáticas seleccionadas fueron consensuadas. Se utilizó como criterio de selección de las temáticas los objetivos terapéuticos. En segundo lugar, para cada caso terapéutico se eligió un objetivo para ser analizado. Objetivo que fue consensuado por dos psicólogos clínicos con formación cognitiva. Y en tercer lugar, en el programa Atlas.Ti 6.2 se realizó la codificación cualitativa de los turnos de habla del paciente, aplicando únicamente una categoría a cada turno, por dos psicólogos clínicos cognitivos siguiendo como orientación una tabulación prees- tablecida en base a la Pauta de Reconstrucción de Malestar Psicológico RMPS que se utilizó para crear las categorías (Quiñones, 2010; 2008a, 2008b). Se generaron un total de 16 categorías, y de ellas, se seleccionaron con criterio clínico 5 categorías, que fueron las variables analizadas en la presente inves- tigación. Estas fueron: Información Novedosa (IN), Afrontamiento (AF), Sentido de Sí Mismo y Tiempo Fluido (S-TF), Procesos de Mentalización (PM) y Na- rrativa Reflexiva (NR).