Abstract:To adapt teaching to the prerequisites of students, teachers have various options at their disposal to gather and process information as the basis to form a judgment, such as carrying out tests, talking to and observing the behavior of students, or administering tasks. The complexity of such a judgment arises from the multitude of observations and their different possible explanations. This complexity might be reduced when teachers focus on one hypothesis instead of considering multiple hypotheses, interpret information in a confirmatory way, and not collect diagnostically relevant information. However, in this way, they run the risk of undesirable biased judgments. It therefore seems important to improve diagnostic judgments by selecting and processing information in a more reflective way. Research indicates that if information on a student is not easily available but restricted (e.g., by time pressure, difficult access to the student or high effort), a teacher who wants to make a careful decision is forced to rely on more reflective processes in the selection of tasks and in the interpretation of solutions. The present experimental study therefore investigates how the restricted availability of information in a specific diagnostic situation-when diagnostically inexperienced prospective mathematics teachers determine misconceptions in decimal fractions-influences the underlying cognitive processes. We assume that restricting the availability of information on student behavior augments the attentional focus and therefore reduces cognitive biases. Such more reflective processing can be observed by an increased time spent per piece of information, which should lead to the processing of relevant information and further increase judgment accuracy. To investigate these hypotheses, prospective teachers without prior knowledge in diagnosing misconceptions (N = 81) were asked to diagnose misconceptions on decimal fractions of virtual students by collecting information on students' solutions. Data concerning the effects of restricting the availability of information on teachers' cognitive processes were analyzed. The results show that with restricted information, participants indeed select a greater proportion of diagnostically relevant tasks, which positively influences judgment accuracy. These results are discussed with respect to their significance for framing teacher training and for further research.

The Influence of Effortful Thought and Cognitive Proficiencies on the Conjunction Fallacy: Implications for Dual-Process Theories of Reasoning and Judgment

Concise and Organized Perception Facilitates Large Language Models for Deductive Reasoning.

The conjunction fallacy: confirmation or relevance?

Analyizing the Conjunction Fallacy as a Fact

Probability errors in children's judgements about the likelihood of social characteristics

The conjunction fallacy and interference effects

On the Interplay Between Interpretation and Reasoning in Compelling Fallacies

Dual-task Costs in Memory Recall Precision Reflect Shared Representational Space

Clinical reasoning performance assessment: using situated cognition theory as a conceptual framework

Fast logic?: Examining the time course assumption of dual process theory

Decontextualised minds: adolescents with autism are less susceptible to the conjunction fallacy than typically developing adolescents

New normative standards of conditional reasoning and the dual-source model

Bringing Order to the Cognitive Fallacy Zoo

How context influences the processing of relevant information and judgment accuracy-the role of information restriction in judgment processes in diagnosing misconceptions

Mistakes in Thinking about Cognitive Science and How to Reduce Them

When Type 2 Processing Misfires: The Indiscriminate Use of Statistical Thinking about Reasoning Problems

Metacognitive control in single- vs. dual-process theory

Acquiescing to intuition in individuals prone to delusions: alterations in dual processes and cognitive control

Cognitive Argumentation and the Suppression Task

Deliberation’s Blindsight

Revisiting causal pluralism: Intention, process, and dependency in cases of double prevention