Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Matthew Inglis is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Matthew Inglis.


PLOS ONE | 2013

Individual Differences in Inhibitory Control, Not Non-Verbal Number Acuity, Correlate with Mathematics Achievement

Camilla K. Gilmore; Nina Attridge; Sarah Clayton; Lucy Cragg; Samantha Johnson; Neil Marlow; Victoria Simms; Matthew Inglis

Given the well-documented failings in mathematics education in many Western societies, there has been an increased interest in understanding the cognitive underpinnings of mathematical achievement. Recent research has proposed the existence of an Approximate Number System (ANS) which allows individuals to represent and manipulate non-verbal numerical information. Evidence has shown that performance on a measure of the ANS (a dot comparison task) is related to mathematics achievement, which has led researchers to suggest that the ANS plays a critical role in mathematics learning. Here we show that, rather than being driven by the nature of underlying numerical representations, this relationship may in fact be an artefact of the inhibitory control demands of some trials of the dot comparison task. This suggests that recent work basing mathematics assessments and interventions around dot comparison tasks may be inappropriate.


Psychonomic Bulletin & Review | 2011

Non-verbal number acuity correlates with symbolic mathematics achievement:But only in children

Matthew Inglis; Nina Attridge; Sophie Batchelor; Camilla K. Gilmore

The process by which adults develop competence in symbolic mathematics tasks is poorly understood. Nonhuman animals, human infants, and human adults all form nonverbal representations of the approximate numerosity of arrays of dots and are capable of using these representations to perform basic mathematical operations. Several researchers have speculated that individual differences in the acuity of such nonverbal number representations provide the basis for individual differences in symbolic mathematical competence. Specifically, prior research has found that 14-year-old children’s ability to rapidly compare the numerosities of two sets of colored dots is correlated with their mathematics achievements at ages 5–11. In the present study, we demonstrated that although when measured concurrently the same relationship holds in children, it does not hold in adults. We conclude that the association between nonverbal number acuity and mathematics achievement changes with age and that nonverbal number representations do not hold the key to explaining the wide variety of mathematical performance levels in adults.


Acta Psychologica | 2014

Indexing the approximate number system

Matthew Inglis; Camilla K. Gilmore

Much recent research attention has focused on understanding individual differences in the approximate number system, a cognitive system believed to underlie human mathematical competence. To date researchers have used four main indices of ANS acuity, and have typically assumed that they measure similar properties. Here we report a study which questions this assumption. We demonstrate that the numerical ratio effect has poor test-retest reliability and that it does not relate to either Weber fractions or accuracy on nonsymbolic comparison tasks. Furthermore, we show that Weber fractions follow a strongly skewed distribution and that they have lower test-retest reliability than a simple accuracy measure. We conclude by arguing that in the future researchers interested in indexing individual differences in ANS acuity should use accuracy figures, not Weber fractions or numerical ratio effects.


Cognition and Instruction | 2009

The Effect of Authority on the Persuasiveness of Mathematical Arguments

Matthew Inglis; Juan Pablo Mejia-Ramos

Three experiments are reported that investigate the extent to which an authority figure influences the level of persuasion undergraduate students and research-active mathematicians invest in mathematical arguments. We demonstrate that, in some situations, both students and researchers rate arguments as being more persuasive when they are associated with an expert mathematician than when the author is anonymous. We develop a model that accounts for these data by suggesting that, for both students and researchers, an authority figure only plays a role when there is already some uncertainty about the arguments mathematical status. Implications for pedagogy, and for future research, are discussed.


Journal of Computer Assisted Learning | 2011

Individual differences in students' use of optional learning resources

Matthew Inglis; Aruna S. Palipana; Sven Trenholm; John P. Ward

We investigated ways in which undergraduates use optional learning resources in a typical blended learning environment. Specifically, we recorded how often students attended live face-to-face lectures, accessed online recorded lectures, and visited a mathematics learning support centre during a multivariate calculus course. Four distinct study strategies emerged, but surprisingly none involved making heavy use of more than one resource. In contrast with some earlier research, the general strategy a student adopted was related to their academic achievement, both in the multivariate calculus course, and in their degree programme more widely. Those students who often accessed online lectures had lower attainment than those who often attended live lectures or the support centre. We discuss the implications of these findings and suggest that ‘blended teaching environments’ may be a more accurate description for what have previously been called ‘blended learning environments’.


Educational Psychologist | 2014

How Mathematicians Obtain Conviction: Implications for Mathematics Instruction and Research on Epistemic Cognition

Keith Weber; Matthew Inglis; Juan Pablo Mejia-Ramos

The received view of mathematical practice is that mathematicians gain certainty in mathematical assertions by deductive evidence rather than empirical or authoritarian evidence. This assumption has influenced mathematics instruction where students are expected to justify assertions with deductive arguments rather than by checking the assertion with specific examples or appealing to authorities. In this article, we argue that the received view about mathematical practice is too simplistic; some mathematicians sometimes gain high levels of conviction with empirical or authoritarian evidence and sometimes do not gain full conviction from the proofs that they read. We discuss what implications this might have, both for mathematics instruction and theories of epistemic cognition.


Cognition | 2013

Sampling from the mental number line: How are approximate number system representations formed? ☆

Matthew Inglis; Camilla K. Gilmore

Nonsymbolic comparison tasks are commonly used to index the acuity of an individuals Approximate Number System (ANS), a cognitive mechanism believed to be involved in the development of number skills. Here we asked whether the time that an individual spends observing numerical stimuli influences the precision of the resultant ANS representations. Contrary to standard computational models of the ANS, we found that the longer the stimulus was displayed, the more precise was the resultant representation. We propose an adaptation of the standard model, and suggest that this finding has significant methodological implications for numerical cognition research.


Topics in Cognitive Science | 2013

On Mathematicians' Different Standards When Evaluating Elementary Proofs

Matthew Inglis; Juan Pablo Mejia-Ramos; Keith Weber; Lara Alcock

In this article, we report a study in which 109 research-active mathematicians were asked to judge the validity of a purported proof in undergraduate calculus. Significant results from our study were as follows: (a) there was substantial disagreement among mathematicians regarding whether the argument was a valid proof, (b) applied mathematicians were more likely than pure mathematicians to judge the argument valid, (c) participants who judged the argument invalid were more confident in their judgments than those who judged it valid, and (d) participants who judged the argument valid usually did not change their judgment when presented with a reason raised by other mathematicians for why the proof should be judged invalid. These findings suggest that, contrary to some claims in the literature, there is not a single standard of validity among contemporary mathematicians.


PLOS ONE | 2013

Advanced Mathematical Study and the Development of Conditional Reasoning Skills

Nina Attridge; Matthew Inglis

Since the time of Plato, philosophers and educational policy-makers have assumed that the study of mathematics improves ones general ‘thinking skills’. Today, this argument, known as the ‘Theory of Formal Discipline’ is used in policy debates to prioritize mathematics in school curricula. But there is no strong research evidence which justifies it. We tested the Theory of Formal Discipline by tracking the development of conditional reasoning behavior in students studying post-compulsory mathematics compared to post-compulsory English literature. In line with the Theory of Formal Discipline, the mathematics students did develop their conditional reasoning to a greater extent than the literature students, despite them having received no explicit tuition in conditional logic. However, this development appeared to be towards the so-called defective conditional understanding, rather than the logically normative material conditional understanding. We conclude by arguing that Plato may have been correct to claim that studying advanced mathematics is associated with the development of logical reasoning skills, but that the nature of this development may be more complex than previously thought.


Journal of Numerical Cognition , 2 (1) pp. 20-41. (2016) | 2016

Challenges in Mathematical Cognition: A Collaboratively-Derived Research Agenda

Lara Alcock; Daniel Ansari; Sophie Batchelor; Marie-Josée Bisson; Bert De Smedt; Camilla K. Gilmore; Silke M. Göbel; Minna M. Hannula-Sormunen; Jeremy Hodgen; Matthew Inglis; Ian Jones; M. Mazzocco; Nicole M. McNeil; Michael Schneider; Victoria Simms; Keith Weber

This paper reports on a collaborative exercise designed to generate a coherent agenda for research on mathematical cognition. Following an established method, the exercise brought together 16 mathematical cognition researchers from across the fields of mathematics education, psychology and neuroscience. These participants engaged in a process in which they generated an initial list of research questions with the potential to significantly advance understanding of mathematical cognition, winnowed this list to a smaller set of priority questions, and refined the eventual questions to meet criteria related to clarity, specificity and practicability. The resulting list comprises 26 questions divided into six broad topic areas: elucidating the nature of mathematical thinking, mapping predictors and processes of competence development, charting developmental trajectories and their interactions, fostering conceptual understanding and procedural skill, designing effective interventions, and developing valid and reliable measures. In presenting these questions in this paper, we intend to support greater coherence in both investigation and reporting, to build a stronger base of information for consideration by policymakers, and to encourage researchers to take a consilient approach to addressing important challenges in mathematical cognition.

Collaboration


Dive into the Matthew Inglis's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Lara Alcock

Loughborough University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ian Jones

Loughborough University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge