1 / 21

Shades of Gray: Ambiguity Tolerance & Statistical Thinking

Shades of Gray: Ambiguity Tolerance & Statistical Thinking. Robert H. Carver Stonehill College/Brandeis University Session 385 JSM 2007 Salt Lake City. Outline. Brief review of JSM 2006 paper Modifications in current work Methods Results Invitation to participate. Ambiguity Tolerance.

mave
Download Presentation

Shades of Gray: Ambiguity Tolerance & Statistical Thinking

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Shades of Gray: Ambiguity Tolerance & Statistical Thinking Robert H. Carver Stonehill College/Brandeis University Session 385 JSM 2007 Salt Lake City

  2. Outline • Brief review of JSM 2006 paper • Modifications in current work • Methods • Results • Invitation to participate

  3. Ambiguity Tolerance • Frenkel-Brunswik, Else (1948) • Ambiguity Tolerance Construct: • Some are stimulated by ambiguity, some are threatened • Personality trait vs. preferred process • Enduring personality attribute vs. context-dependent • Relationship to rigidity, uncertainty tolerance, openness

  4. Very low A.T. “Never, ever, think outside the box”

  5. JSM 2006 paper • Ambiguity tolerance construct • Focus on “inferential thinking”—skill of drawing actionable conclusions based on incomplete information • Hypothesized that people with Low AT would have difficulty becoming facile with inferential thinking tasks • Mixed findings

  6. Research Questions • Is ambiguity tolerance (AT) a predictor of success in a student’s development of statistical thinking skills? • Does AT interact with other success factors?

  7. Sample Sample: • 85 undergraduates enrolled over 2 semesters • Differences among sections • Technology: Minitab vs. SAS (Learning Ed.) • Normal, Learning Community, Honors

  8. Sample • Informed consent • Illustration of research design • Modeling ethical research practice • Illustration of some methods • Credit & incentives • Course-embedded data collection

  9. Methods Dependent variable: • Score on Comprehensive Assessment of Outcomes for a first course in Statistics (CAOS) post-test • Developed by Web ARTIST Project (U.Minnesota and Cal Poly) team • Pre- and Post-test (40 items each) • URL: https://data.gen.umn.edu/artist//tests/index.html

  10. CAOS post-test Improvement

  11. Questions/Methods Independent Measures & variables: • McLain’s AT scale: • 22 question instrument 7-point Likert Scales • Max score for extreme tolerance = 74 • Min score for extreme intolerance = - 58 • Reliability: Cronbach’s alpha = 0.897 • In this sample a = 0.872

  12. Typical Scale Items • I don’t tolerate ambiguous situations well. • I’m drawn to situations which can be interpreted in more than one way. • I enjoy tackling problems which are complex enough to be ambiguous. • I find it hard to make a choice when the outcome is uncertain.

  13. Distribution of AT

  14. Covariates investigated • Score on CAOS Pre-test • Prior Stat Education (37% had some) • Section dummy variables (Honors, L.C., etc.) • Course Performance variables • Attendance • Gender dummy (49% female; 51% male) • First-year student dummy (61% 1st year) • Math SAT

  15. Findings: CAOS Pre-test A.T. did not have a significant main effect on Pre-test scores

  16. Findings:CAOS Post-Test AT score has an effect (p < 0.10) on Post-Test reasoning score

  17. Findings:CAOS Post-Test AT score has a significant (p < 0.05) effect on Post-Test reasoning score

  18. Discussion • Main Findings: • AT showed a positive main effect • AT was not predictive of course performance • Concerns: • CAOS measure several aspects of statistical thinking • AT scale may measure several factors • Small sample • Substantial unexplained variance

  19. Discussion & Questions • An individual’s orientation toward ambiguity can affect his/her success with statistical reasoning. • AT construct may provide a metaphor for statistical thinking • Relationship between AT and Learning Styles? • Can these results be replicated, especially in larger samples?

  20. Discussion & Questions • Would the results hold up with different measures of statistical reasoning? • Do other personality or personal style variables shape success in statistical reasoning? • How can we structure pedagogy to address personality variation among learners? • Does A.T. affect application of statistical reasoning in practice?

  21. Replication? • Contact me… • rcarver@stonehill.edu • rcarver@brandeis.edu • http://faculty.stonehill.edu/rcarver/

More Related