1 resultado para Criticism of Descartes
em Universidade Complutense de Madrid
Filtro por publicador
- KUPS-Datenbank - Universität zu Köln - Kölner UniversitätsPublikationsServer (1)
- Aberystwyth University Repository - Reino Unido (3)
- Adam Mickiewicz University Repository (5)
- AMS Tesi di Dottorato - Alm@DL - Università di Bologna (3)
- Andina Digital - Repositorio UASB-Digital - Universidade Andina Simón Bolívar (4)
- Aquatic Commons (3)
- ArchiMeD - Elektronische Publikationen der Universität Mainz - Alemanha (1)
- Archimer: Archive de l'Institut francais de recherche pour l'exploitation de la mer (1)
- Archive of European Integration (7)
- Archivo Digital para la Docencia y la Investigación - Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad del País Vasco (7)
- Aston University Research Archive (15)
- Biblioteca de Teses e Dissertações da USP (1)
- Biblioteca Digital | Sistema Integrado de Documentación | UNCuyo - UNCUYO. UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE CUYO. (8)
- Biblioteca Digital da Produção Intelectual da Universidade de São Paulo (2)
- Biblioteca Digital da Produção Intelectual da Universidade de São Paulo (BDPI/USP) (1)
- Biblioteca Digital de la Universidad Católica Argentina (7)
- Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações Eletrônicas da UERJ (20)
- BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Suiça (12)
- Boston University Digital Common (2)
- Brock University, Canada (12)
- Bucknell University Digital Commons - Pensilvania - USA (2)
- CentAUR: Central Archive University of Reading - UK (57)
- Center for Jewish History Digital Collections (3)
- Central European University - Research Support Scheme (1)
- Chinese Academy of Sciences Institutional Repositories Grid Portal (1)
- Cochin University of Science & Technology (CUSAT), India (3)
- CORA - Cork Open Research Archive - University College Cork - Ireland (14)
- Corvinus Research Archive - The institutional repository for the Corvinus University of Budapest (2)
- Dalarna University College Electronic Archive (5)
- Deakin Research Online - Australia (80)
- Digital Archives@Colby (5)
- Digital Commons @ DU | University of Denver Research (2)
- Digital Commons at Florida International University (3)
- DigitalCommons@The Texas Medical Center (1)
- DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln (1)
- DRUM (Digital Repository at the University of Maryland) (2)
- Duke University (4)
- Glasgow Theses Service (1)
- Greenwich Academic Literature Archive - UK (32)
- Harvard University (6)
- Helda - Digital Repository of University of Helsinki (32)
- Indian Institute of Science - Bangalore - Índia (2)
- Instituto Politécnico do Porto, Portugal (2)
- Memoria Académica - FaHCE, UNLP - Argentina (26)
- Memorial University Research Repository (1)
- Nottingham eTheses (2)
- Portal de Revistas Científicas Complutenses - Espanha (16)
- QSpace: Queen's University - Canada (1)
- QUB Research Portal - Research Directory and Institutional Repository for Queen's University Belfast (47)
- Queensland University of Technology - ePrints Archive (114)
- ReCiL - Repositório Científico Lusófona - Grupo Lusófona, Portugal (1)
- Repositorio Académico de la Universidad Nacional de Costa Rica (1)
- Repositório Científico da Universidade de Évora - Portugal (2)
- Repositório Científico do Instituto Politécnico de Lisboa - Portugal (1)
- Repositorio de la Universidad de Cuenca (1)
- Repositório digital da Fundação Getúlio Vargas - FGV (9)
- Repositório Institucional da Universidade de Brasília (1)
- Repositório Institucional da Universidade Estadual de São Paulo - UNESP (2)
- Repositório Institucional da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (1)
- Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de La Laguna (2)
- Repositório Institucional UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista "Julio de Mesquita Filho" (76)
- Royal College of Art Research Repository - Uninet Kingdom (1)
- RUN (Repositório da Universidade Nova de Lisboa) - FCT (Faculdade de Cienecias e Technologia), Universidade Nova de Lisboa (UNL), Portugal (3)
- School of Medicine, Washington University, United States (1)
- Universidad de Alicante (2)
- Universidad del Rosario, Colombia (1)
- Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (6)
- Universidade Complutense de Madrid (1)
- Universidade de Lisboa - Repositório Aberto (5)
- Universidade Federal do Pará (5)
- Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) (12)
- Universidade Metodista de São Paulo (20)
- Universidade Técnica de Lisboa (1)
- Universitat de Girona, Spain (2)
- Université de Lausanne, Switzerland (5)
- Université de Montréal (3)
- Université de Montréal, Canada (31)
- University of Michigan (118)
- University of Queensland eSpace - Australia (8)
- University of Southampton, United Kingdom (1)
- University of Washington (7)
- WestminsterResearch - UK (5)
- Worcester Research and Publications - Worcester Research and Publications - UK (3)
Resumo:
Hoekstra et al. (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2014, 21:1157–1164) surveyed the interpretation of confidence intervals (CIs) by first-year students, master students, and researchers with six items expressing misinterpretations of CIs. They asked respondents to answer all items, computed the number of items endorsed, and concluded that misinterpretation of CIs is robust across groups. Their design may have produced this outcome artifactually for reasons that we describe. This paper discusses first the two interpretations of CIs and, hence, why misinterpretation cannot be inferred from endorsement of some of the items. Next, a re-analysis of Hoekstra et al.’s data reveals some puzzling differences between first-year and master students that demand further investigation. For that purpose, we designed a replication study with an extended questionnaire including two additional items that express correct interpretations of CIs (to compare endorsement of correct vs. nominally incorrect interpretations) and we asked master students to indicate which items they would have omitted had they had the option (to distinguish deliberate from uninformed endorsement caused by the forced-response format). Results showed that incognizant first-year students endorsed correct and nominally incorrect items identically, revealing that the two item types are not differentially attractive superficially; in contrast, master students were distinctively more prone to endorsing correct items when their uninformed responses were removed, although they admitted to nescience more often that might have been expected. Implications for teaching practices are discussed.