Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem: http://hdl.handle.net/10201/53872

Registro completo de metadatos
Campo DCValorLengua/Idioma
dc.contributor.authorEstudillo, Alejandro J.-
dc.contributor.authorBermudo Romero, Estefanía-
dc.contributor.authorCasado, Nerea-
dc.contributor.authorPrasad Das, Jay-
dc.date.accessioned2017-07-27T15:39:49Z-
dc.date.available2017-07-27T15:39:49Z-
dc.date.created2015-
dc.date.issued2015-05-
dc.identifier.issn1695-2294-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10201/53872-
dc.description.abstractExiste considerable evidencia que muestra que las multiplicaciones y las sumas simples se resuelven de manera directa y automática. Sin embargo, la evidencia sobre la automaticidad de restas y divisiones es menos convincente. Usando el paradigma de interferencia en la operación, el presente estudio explora si el resultado de una resta puede ser recuperado inintencionadamente y el rol que juega el tamaño del problema en este proceso. Sesenta y dos participantes tomaron parte en este estudio y tenían que decidir si el resultado de una adición era o no correcto. En las adiciones incorrectas el resultado podía ser la sustracción de los sumandos (7 + 4 = 3) o un número no relacionado (7 + 4 = 5). Nuestros resultados mostraron más errores y respuestas más lentas en aquellos problemas cuyo resultado era la sustracción de los sumandos que en los problemas no relacionados. Sin embargo, estos resultados sólo se encontraron en problemas pequeños (7 + 4 = 3 vs. 7 + 4 = 5) y no en problemas más grandes (14 + 8 = 6 vs. 14 + 8 = 7). Estos resultados sugieren que las sustracciones pequeñas pueden ser recuperadas directamente, cuestionando la existencia de disociaciones entre operaciones. Argumentamos que dependiendo de nuestra experiencia, las mismas representaciones y procesos pueden estar implicados en la resolución de multiplicaciones, adiciones y sustracciones.es
dc.description.abstractThe evidence showing that simple multiplications and additions can be solved by direct retrieval is considerable. However evidence about division and subtraction is less compelling. By using a ―cross-operation interference paradigm‖ the present research explores whether subtraction problems can be retrieved without intention and the role of operands‘ problem-size in this process. Sixty-two participants decided whether the displayed addition was correct or not. In ―false additions problems‖ the answer could be the result of the subtractions of the addends (e.g., 7 + 4 = 3) or an unrelated number (e.g., 7 + 4 = 5). Results showed an interference effect, that is, more errors and slower response times in subtraction related problems than in unrelated problems. More importantly, this effect was restricted to small problems (7 + 4 = 3 vs. 7 + 4 = 5), whereas no differences were found for large problems (14 + 8 = 6 vs. 14 + 8 = 7). These results suggest that small subtractions can be retrieved directly as multiplications, questioning a traditional dissociation between operations. We argue that, depending on individual experience, the same representation and processes can be involved in solving additions, subtractions and multiplications.es
dc.description.abstractThe evidence showing that simple multiplications and additions can be solved by direct retrieval is considerable. However evidence about division and subtraction is less compelling. By using a ―cross-operation interference paradigm‖ the present research explores whether subtraction problems can be retrieved without intention and the role of operands‘ problem-size in this process. Sixty-two participants decided whether the displayed addition was correct or not. In ―false additions problems‖ the answer could be the result of the subtractions of the addends (e.g., 7 + 4 = 3) or an unrelated number (e.g., 7 + 4 = 5). Results showed an interference effect, that is, more errors and slower response times in subtraction related problems than in unrelated problems. More importantly, this effect was restricted to small problems (7 + 4 = 3 vs. 7 + 4 = 5), whereas no differences were found for large problems (14 + 8 = 6 vs. 14 + 8 = 7). These results suggest that small subtractions can be retrieved directly as multiplications, questioning a traditional dissociation between operations. We argue that, depending on individual experience, the same representation and processes can be involved in solving additions, subtractions and multiplications.en_EN
dc.formatapplication/pdfes
dc.format.extent8es
dc.languagespaes
dc.languageenges
dc.publisherMurcia: Universidad de Murcia, Editumes
dc.relation.ispartofseriesVol 31, No 2 (2015)es
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses
dc.subjectSustraccioneses
dc.subjectAutomaticidades
dc.subjectTamaño del Problemaes
dc.subjectResolución Aritméticaes
dc.subject.other159.9 - Psicologíaes
dc.titleLa automaticidad en las restas depende del tamaño del problemes
dc.title.alternativeAutomaticity in subtractions depends on problem-sizeen_EN
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees
Aparece en las colecciones:Vol. 31, Nº 2 (2015)

Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción TamañoFormato 
La automaticidad en las restas depende del tamaño del problem.pdf286,21 kBAdobe PDFVista previa
Visualizar/Abrir


Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons Licencia Creative Commons Creative Commons