Does correlation heuristic dependence reduce due to classroom teaching? A case study from India

Introduction

People worldwide have problems understanding the basic stock-flow principles (e.g., correlation heuristic), which govern many everyday tasks. Perhaps, teaching system dynamic concepts in classroom settings might reduce people's dependence on the correlation heuristic. However, limited literature exists on the effectiveness of classroom curricula in reducing reliance on the correlation heuristic. The present research aims to bridge this gap and empirically understand the effects of classroom teaching programs on reducing people's reliance on correlation heuristic and improving people's ability to understand stock-flow concepts. By taking a case from a reputed technology Institute in India, the present research examines how classroom teaching of system dynamics concepts might help students reduce their dependence on the correlation heuristic.

Methods

The experiment consisted of two between-subjects conditions: the experimental and the control (N = 45 in each condition). The experimental condition consisted of randomly registered students that were taught system dynamics principles over 5-months of classroom training. Though, no teaching took place in the control condition. Participants in both conditions were evaluated on their ability to solve stock-flow problems.

Results

Participants in the experimental condition were found to perform better in solving stock-flow problems than subjects in the control condition, and they also relied less on the correlation heuristic.

Discussion

We emphasize the relevance of system dynamics education in graduate curricula in alleviating reliance on the correlation heuristic.

Not taking the easy road: When similarity hurts learning

Two experimental studies examined the effects of example format and example similarity on mathematical problem solving across different learning contexts. Participants were more successful inducing a correct problem-solving rule when they were provided with annotated examples rather than nonannotated examples. The effects of example similarity varied depending on learning context. In Experiment 1, by presenting an example and problem simultaneously, a direct comparison was possible between the cases. When the examples were similar, participants relied on superficial analogies that hurt learning. When an example was dissimilar from the given problem, participants appeared to study the example first to induce a solution procedure and then apply the rule to the problem, thus resulting in better learning and transfer. However, in Experiment 2 where the example and problem were presented in a sequential manner, the effect disappeared because the learning context did not support a direct comparison. We conclude that comparison is not inherently good for promoting learning and transfer, rather its effect depends on whether it supports relational mapping that is essential for schema acquisition.