Cargando…

Comparing apples and pears in studies on magnitude estimations

The present article is concerned with studies on magnitude estimations that strived to uncover the underlying mental representation(s) of magnitudes. We point out a number of methodological differences and shortcomings that make it difficult drawing general conclusions. To solve this problem, we pro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ebersbach, Mirjam, Luwel, Koen, Verschaffel, Lieven
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3684793/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23785346
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00332
Descripción
Sumario:The present article is concerned with studies on magnitude estimations that strived to uncover the underlying mental representation(s) of magnitudes. We point out a number of methodological differences and shortcomings that make it difficult drawing general conclusions. To solve this problem, we propose a taxonomy by which those studies could be classified, taking into account central methodological aspects of magnitude estimation tasks. Finally, we suggest perspectives for future research on magnitude estimations, which might abandon the hunt for the mathematical model that explains estimations best and turn, instead, to investigate the underlying principles of estimations (e.g., strategies) and ways of their improvement.