PERAN KEYAKINAN DALAM BERPIKIR INTUITIF KETIKA MEMECAHKAN MASALAH MODUS TOLLENS

Authors

  • Purna Bayu Nugroho Universitas Muhammadiyah Kotabumi
  • Puguh Darmawan Universitas PGRI Banyuwangi
  • Badawi Badawi Universitas Muhammadiyah Kotabumi

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24269/silogisme.v6i2.4165

Abstract

Penelitian ini bertujuan mengkaji kasus pemecahan masalah modus tollens yang berkaitan dengan keyakinan. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian kualitatis dengan kenis studi kasus. Kasus yang dikaji dalam penelitian ini adalah kasus kolektif. Subjek penelitian adalah tiga mahasiswa Pendidikan matematika yang telah belajar logika matematika. Instrumen penelitian ini adalah Peneliti, masalah modus tollens, rubrik indikator, lembar validasi, buku catatan dan pedoman wawancara. Hasil penelitian ini adalah proses mental yang terkategori menjadi tiga dalam pemecahan masalah modus tolens. Tiga kategori proses mental itu adalah logic beyond belief, belief surrounds thinking1, dan belief surrounds thinking 2. Karakteristik logic beyond belief adalah menghasilkan jawaban benar dengan alasan benar, keyakinan terkontrol oleh sistem 2. Karakteristik belief surrounds thinking 1 adalah menghasilkan jawaban benar dengan alasan salah, mengubah jawaban berdasarkan keyakinan. Karakteristik belief surrounds thinking 2 adalah menghasilkan jawaban salah dengan alasan salah berdasarkan keyakinan.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ackerman, R., & Thompson, V. (2017). Meta-Reasoning : Monitoring and Control of Thinking and Reasoning Meta-Reasoning : Monitoring and Control of Thinking and Reasoning Acknowledgments. Trends in Cognitiv e Sciences, 21(8), 607–617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.05.004

Bago, B., & De Neys, W. (2017). Fast logic ?: Examining the time course assumption of dual process theory. Cognition, 158, 90–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.10.014

Borodin, A. (2016). The Need for an Application of Dual-Process Theory to Mathematics Education. Cambridge Open-Review Educational Research e-Journal, 3, 1–31.

Darmawan, P. (2017). Berpikir Analitik Mahasiswa Dalam Mengonstruksi Bukti Secara Sintaksis. JPM : Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 2(2), 154. https://doi.org/10.33474/jpm.v2i2.196

Darmawan, P. (2020). Students Analytical Thinking in Solving Problems of Polygon Areas. Kontinu: Jurnal Penelitian Didaktik Matematika, 4(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.30659/kontinu.4.1.17-32

Darmawan, P., Purwanto, P., Parta, I. N., & Susiswo, S. (2020a). Interaksi Dual Proses dalam Menyelesaikan Masalah Segibanyak Siswa Sekolah Dasar. Universitas Negeri Malang.

Darmawan, P., Purwanto, P., Parta, I. N., & Susiswo, S. (2021). Teacher Interventions to Induce Students ’ Awareness in Controlling their Intuition. Bolema - Mathematics Education Bulletin, 35(70), 745–765. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1980-4415v35n70a10

Darmawan, P., Purwanto, Parta, I. N., & Susiswo. (2020b). The levels of students’ feeling of rightness (for) in solving polygon perimeter problems. International Journal of Instruction, 13(2), 549–566. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13238a

De Neys, W. (2018). Dual Process Theory 2.0 (First). Routledge.

Durning, S. J., Dong, T., Artino, A. R., & Schuwirth, L. (2015). Dual processing theory and experts ’ reasoning : exploring thinking on national multiple-choice questions. Perspectives on Medical Education, 4(4), 168–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-015-0196-6

Gillies, D. (2019). Serendipity and Mathematical Logic. April.

Handley, S. J., & Trippas, D. (2015). Dual Processes and the Interplay between Knowledge and Structure : A New Parallel Processing Model. In The Pschology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 62). Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.plm.2014.09.002

NCTM. (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Inc.

NCTM. (2009). Reasoning and Sense Making. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Nugroho, P. B., Nusantara, T., Rahman As, A., Sisworo, Hidayanto, E., & Susiswo. (2018). Critical Thinking Disposition: Students Skeptic in Dealing with Ill-Logical Mathematics Problem. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 635–648. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11343a

Pennycook, G., Ross, R. M., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2017). to recognize incompetence Dunning – Kruger effects in reasoning : Theoretical implications of the failure to recognize incompetence. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(6), 1774–1784. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1242-7

Podnieks, K. (2017). Introduction to Mathematical Logic Hyper-textbook for students University of Latvia. August 2016.

Reyna, V. F. (2015). How People Make Decisions That Involve Risk. Current Directions in Psuchological Science, 13(2), 60–66.

Rohilla, D. (2021). Mathematical Logic Behind a Magic Trick. May, 0–2.

Sukirman. (2019). Matematika. PT. Gramedia.

Trippas, D., Thompson, V. A., & Handley, S. J. (2016). When fast logic meets slow belief : Evidence for a parallel-processing model of belief bias. Memory & Cognition. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-016-0680-1

Usó-Doménech, J. L., & Nescolarde-Selva, J. A. (2019). Mathematical Logic of Notions and Concepts. Foundations of Science, 24(4), 641–655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-019-09604-9

Downloads

Published

2022-01-02

Issue

Vol. 6 No. 2 (2021): Desember

Section

Artikel

License

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.