J A M E S A.

L E V I N

ESTIMATION
EVERYDAY

TECHNIQUES
MATH

FOR

ARITHMETIC:

AND MATHEMATICS

INSTRUCTION

ABSTRACT. Recent advances in the way that adults perform computation in our society
require reconsideration of the assumptions underlying current elementary mathematics
instruction. The widespread use of calculators and computers for situations requiring
precise calculation removes much of the motivation for teaching the current addition,
subtraction, multiplication, and division algorithms. Yet precisely this use of computing
technology now puts a premium on the exercise of estimation techniques for verifying the
reasonableness of computations. These techniques, especially those that can be used
"mentally" (without the use of any external tools), have been used informally for years,
but never formalized for instruction. This paper discusses a range of estimation techniques,
and presents in detail a series of mental estimation procedures based on the concepts of
measurement and real numbers rather than on counting and integers. A set of techniques
for teaching these procedures is described. These estimation techniques axe evaluated
against the multiple functions that elementary mathematics instruction needs to serve.

We are in the midst of a revolution in the ways we deal with computation in

our society, brought on b y the advent o f cheap microelectronics. As the pocket
calculator has become commonplace, there are fewer and fewer occasions that
require adults to perform the long, laborious, and error prone techniques for
doing complex calculations with numbers written on paper by pencil. A bank
clerk who insisted on adding up long columns o f numbers using the techniques
learned in school would soon be seeking new employment.
This development has implications for the instruction o f mathematics in
our schools. Teaching the pencil and paper computational techniques has been
the cornerstone of mathematics instruction. Much o f this instruction is disrupted when students bring calculators into the classroom. And even when
calculators are not present, the motivation o f students to learn (and teachers
to teach) is problematic i f the skill is seen as useless in everyday life.
Let us examine the rationale for the current paper and pencil techniques.
There are three main functions for learning to compute: (1) for use in professional employment, (2) for use in non-professional everyday life, and (3)
for use as a basis for understanding mathematics.
(1)

Business arithmetic: Are these paper and pencil techniques used in

the business world? Right now, the answer seems to be, not very
much. And the near future prospects (the next five to ten years) are
for the use o f paper and pencil computation algorithms to disappear
from professional use.

Educational Studies in Mathematics 12 (1981) 421--434. 0013--1954/81/0124-0421501.40

Copyright 9 1981 by D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht, Holland, and Boston, U.S.A.

422
(2)

(3)

JAMES A. LEVIN

Non-business everyday arithmetic: Are these paper and pencil techniques used in everyday life by adults outside of work environments?
The surprising answer here is again, not very much. Often adults in
our society need to compute, but recent research examining actual
use of arithmetic by normal adults has shown that adults rarely use
the paper and pencil techniques they learned in school in non-work
settings (Lave, 1979). Instead, they evolve various techniques for
mentally estimating the results they need.
Introduction to higher mathematics: Are these pencil and paper techniques necessary as a basis for further instruction in other branches of
mathematics? Again, the perhaps surprising answer is no. The right
to left algorithms are not necessary for teaching the important concepts of arithmetic. Also, arithmetic is not the only entry point into
higher mathematics. For example, geometry, topology, and set
theory can each serve as an entry point to higher mathematics. Geometry, since it can be presented in a more visual way, may well be
a much better entry point for pedogogical reasons than arithmetic
computation.

This is the challenge to current mathematics instruction: to find new ways

that aid people in carrying out accurate computation using calculators and
computers, new ways to help people perform the mental computations they
do in everyday non-formal settings, and that form a basis for further instruction in mathematics. Is this an impossible challenge? Let us attack it by considering what is actually needed to achieve the first two functions.

Computation with Paper and Pencil

The existing techniques for computation with paper and pencil were developed
to allow reliable operation without erasure. The right-to-left nature, the way of
denoting carry and borrow, the ways of denoting partial results are all products
of the particular characteristics of paper and pencil, which do not easily lend
themselves to mental computation and verification procedures that are such
important adult skills. The use of calculators, computers, and mental estimation each have properties differing from paper and pencil, leading to different techniques for computing results.
The current techniques for addition, subtraction, multiplication, and
division have been widely used only for the last four hundred years or so. The
Greeks considered multicolumn multiplication and division mental feats to
be performed only by advanced mathematicians. Ordinary multiplication was

ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES FOR ARITHMETIC

423

performed by repeated addition and division by successive approximation

(Ball, 1908). The current fight to left algorithms and the common notation of
+, --, = came into use in the mid-sixteenth century (Ball, 1908). So the current
techniques have not always been with u s - Galileo used different (more cumbersome) techniques.
Other techniques for computation, once considered essential to a proper
mathematics training, have fallen out of use, under the impact of improved
computing machinery. The use of logarithmic tables ( " . . . without which
many of the numerical calculations which have constantly to be made would
be practically impossible..." (Ball, 1908, p. 195)) to perform high precision
multiplication and division of large numbers has almost disappeared. The last
major slide rule company recently closed its doors. No computational technique should be considered sacred, but instead examined in light of the functions that it serves.

Computation with Calculators and Computers

Even given the world's most sophisticated computer, people still maintain a
vital role. There is a saying in the computer world: "Garbage in, garbage out".
When using a computer or calculator, there is still a vital need for the user to
check the results for sensibleness. When a person enters ten numbers, each
less than $1.00, and obtains a sum of $110.40, that person needs to be able to
determine that something is wrong.
In a few situations, exact accuracy is required. In these cases, the same
"checking" technique can be carried over from paper and pencil computation
to calculator use. The computation is repeated, sometimes in an alternate or
reciprocal form to see if the indentical result occurs.

Mental Computation and Arithmetic Skills

Left to right computation. There are an alternate set of computational
techniques, now used only by a few people who are "mental calculators", that
are more suited for use without paper and pencil. These techniques generally
involve processing the given numbers from left.to-fight (rather than the usual
right-to-left techniques) (Sticker, 1955). One response, then, to the challenge
of calculators and computers could be to teach students these right-to-left
computational algorithms to use mentally to verify an answer produced by
machine or to compute in situations without calculators or computers. In fact,
computation from left-to-right preceeded the current techniques. "The old
plan continued in partial use till about 1600; even now it would be more

424

JAMES

A. L E V I N

convenient in approximations whereit is necessary to keep only a certain number

of places of decimal." (Ball, 1908, p. 188) Since these techniques require
considerable mental effort for an accurate computation, they are perhaps more
useful when modified to provide results in a reasonable range of accuracy.
In most situations, only approximate accuracy is needed. In dividing up a
restaurant bill, determining the amount to tip, figuring cost and tax, computing miles per gallon of gas, in most everyday situations we only need to be
confident of approximately what the correct answer is. People develop personal approximate techniques for dealing with these situations. But these
techniques are almost never a part of formal curriculum in elementary classrooms, as mental calculation is not recognized as a valued activity. Wrong
answers are treated equally, whether almost correct or wildly inaccurate. In
the adult world the consequences of a gross error are far more serious than
those of minor deviations.

Mental Estimation Techniques

There are a number of estimation techniques, many of which are based on the
current place.value techniques for computation. For example, we can estimate
an answer by computing the "order of magnitude" of the answer. So, if we are
multiplying 0.0034 by 64,534, we can determine that we are multiplying a
10 to the -- 2 fraction by a 10 to the 5 fraction and conclude that the answer
will be a fraction times ten to the 3rd power (that the answer will be less than
1000). So if we enter the numbers into a calculator and get a result of 2194.156,
we know that we've incorrectly entered the numbers.
For more accurate estimation, people often use a "rounding to whole
numbers" approach, sometimes with an "adjustment" afterwards. So, if they
are to multiply 589 by 49.3, they will instead multiply 600 by 50, and then
adjust the answer of 30,000 downward a bit, say to 29,000.
Seldom are these techniques formally taught in schools, and almost never
at the elementary or secondary levels. Yet a common complaint among college teachers is that students don't seem to have a "feel" for numbers and their
computation. So one approach to the challenge raised by calculators and computers would be to explicitly teach children estimation techniques.
But don't estimation techniques require a previously acquired skill with the
current right-to-left computational techniques? How could elementary school
students be taught estimation techniques before they learn to master the conventional computation techniques? Before answering this, let us briefly explore
the basic concepts underlying the conventional techniques and then consider
a different basis for mental estimation.

ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES FOR ARITHMETIC

425

Numbers as Quantity

Traditionally numbers are introduced to novices through the notion of counting. Integers are introduced first, then integer fractions, and only at later
levels, real numbers. Let us consider an alternative way to introduce numbers,
based on the notion of measurement, that provides an equally valid basic
understanding of namber, but that also provides a basis for teaching mental
estimation techniques for addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division.
It is a bit hard to imagine doing addition, subtraction, multiplication, or
division without using the standard techniques and the tables on which they
depend. Let us consider a case in which people spontaneously used a mental
estimation technique that doesn't require the addition or multiplication tables.

Serial Fractionation

Suppose you are faced with a situation in which you have to multiply two
numbers, say to determine what the tip should be on a restaurant bill. You
need to multiply the total of $23.54 by 0.15 (15% tip). Now you could reach
for a handy paper napkin and work through the multi-column algorithm. But
people rarely do this computation with paper and pencil. Instead people use
mental techniques, as it is too much trouble to use paper and pencil. Some
people use the approximation techniques described previously, or develop
special purpose algorithms for each recurring special case (Lave, 1979). However, some people develop general mental techniques for estimating. A study
of how people combine probabilities in a situation of importance to them
(.playing poker) found that some people used the technique of "serial fractionation" (Lopes, 1976).
These subjects were shown two poker hands. They were told that their hand
had a 70% chance of beating one hand, and a 50%chance of beating the other.
What was the chance of beating both hands? This is a situation requiring the
subjects to multiply 0.70 by 0.50 to find the joint probability. Some of the
people in an experiment to examine how people combined this kind of information reported using the following mental technique: they imagined a unit
quantity. Then they imagined taking 70% of this quantity. Next they imagined
taking 50% of this smaller quantity. Then they determined approximately how
much this remaining quantity was of the original unit quantity. This is then the
product of multiplying the two probabilities, which is the probability of beating both hands.
Let us use a line as our unit quantity, to make this technique clearer.
Following is a line, with 0 at one end and 1.0 at the other:

426

JAMES A. LEVIN
1.0
->

Now the first step is to take 70% of the unit quantity, which in this case is
a smaller line, 70% as long as the original:

The next step is to take 50% of this smaller line:

.>
We can now see that this is about 30% or 35% of the original line. This is
the product of the two fractions (0.7 x 0.5), giving us the joint probability
of beating both hands.
Notice that this technique does not require the use of the traditional ~lgorithms for multiplication, nor the use of the multiplication table facts. Instead
it draws on several other kinds of number facts and skills. To use this approach
to multiplication, you need to know how to go from a number to a quantity,
such as a position on a number line. To determine what 70% of a unit line is,
you need to be able to specify where 0.7 is on a number line going from 0.0
to 1.0. You need to be able to apply this skill to lines of different sizes. And
then you need to be able to say what number is represented by a particular
position on a number line.
The two basic skills are required: (1) translating from number to position
on a number line, and (2) translating from position to number. Since these are
basic components of knowledge about number, there are a number of exercises for teaching these two skills. We have developed two computer programs
specifically designed to teach this knowledge, one called Harpoon and one
called Sonar.

Harpoon: A program for teaching position-to-number skills. Harpoon is a computer game (written in Pascal for an Apple II Computer) that presents the
players with a drawing of a shark's fin on the computer screen, with two
perpendicular lines intersecting over the shark. Each line has its endpoints
labeled with numbers. The program asks the players to specify the position of
the shark left and right and then its position up and down. After they enter the
two numbers, a "harpoon" flies across the screen to the position they have
specified. If that spot is close enough to the shark, then the harpoon hits the
shark, and the shark sinks out of view. If the harpoon misses, than a "splash"
occurs on the screen to mark the spot, and the players can try again, using
the splash mark as feedback.
The Harpoon game was inspired by another computer game called Darts

ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES FOR ARITHMETIC

427

(Dugdale & Kibbey, 1975), created explicitly to teach children the number
line. Harpoon has been extensively tested with ten year old children, who find
it challenging and motivating (kevin & Kareev, 1980). Initially they have to
work together to hit the shark, dividing up the responsibility for parts of the
task, but after some practice they can hit the shark with a high degree of
accuracy. They acquire the skills of translating from position on number lines
to numbers. When working with 9nly one dimension (the version most analogous to the original Darts game) children reach proficiency within ten "games ',
moving from random performance to high accuracy (deviation of less than
+ 3% on their first guess).

Sonar: A program for teaching Number-to-Position skill~ Sonar is another

game program (also written in Pascal for the Apple II Computer) that teaches
math skills within the framework of a game. This game is similar to Harpoon,
as the players have the goal of hitting a shark with a harpoon. But in Sonar,
the shark doesn't initially appear on the screen, but is hidden underwater. The
player's "sonar" readout tells where the shark is hiding, giving the X and Y
coordinate numbers. The players try to move the "crosshairs" to that spot on
the screen. Then the harpoon flies to that spot and if it is close enough to the
shark's position, the shark surfaces and then is harpooned. Otherwise, the
harpoon splashes into the water, and the coordinate numbers of their guess
are displayed as feedback.
This game has been tested with ten year old children, who have found it
also challenging and motivating. It teaches the mathematical skill of specifying
a position on a number line, given a number. With this Sonar game and the
Harpoon game, children can learn to have an "intuitive feel" for numbers,
freely converting between numbers and number line lengths. Given these
lower level skills, people can then apply the "serial fractionation" techniques
for multiplication described above to compute the products of fractional
numbers. Note that this technique doesn't require the use of the multicolumn
"long" multiplication technique, nor the use of the elementary multiplication
facts ("the times tables").

Questions of precision. Current paper and pencil computational techniques are

designed to provide absolute accuracy. Children are evaluated on the basis of
producing exactly correct answers in their computations. However, in most
non-school uses of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division, there is
no need for absolute accuracy. In fact, for scientific uses of computation,
students are taught explicitly about the limits of accuracy, and are trained
in techniques for keeping track of the degree of precision in their computations.

428

JAMES A. LEVIN

People checking the results of a calculator or computer often only need to

know that the answers are within a reasonable range of accuracy.
An important characteristic for mental estimation techniques is that they be
able to provide a whole spectrum of precision, from very rough approximation
to high precision. The rough approximation techniques should be easy to
apply, while higher precision uses can require more effort. The techniques
should provide partial results that are more and more accurate approximations
of the ideal answer.
Note that these are not characteristics of the current paper and pencil
techniques. The current multicolumn multiplication techniques, for example,
produce partial results that are far from approximations to the accurate answer. Some advanced university students are taught approximation techniques,
but these are separate processes from the normal computational techniques.
There is a need for an integrated process, that has the following characteristics:
(1)
(2)
(3)

The computational techniques can be applied mentally (with no

recourse to external aids, like calculators, paper and pencil, or abaci).
The techniques produce partial results as they are applied that are
successively closer approximations.
The techniques are easy enough to apply to produce sufficient precision for people in most situations so that they prefer to use them
over the alternatives (using a calculator, figuring on paper and pencil,
asking someone, or not calculating at all).

Current research (Lave, 1979) on how people actually handle computation

in non-school life has found that the existing computational techniques are
hardly used in everyday situations. Instead, people develop special purpose estimation techniques, they find the answer somehow, or they find some way to
avoid the calculation altogether. Given that these techniques were developed
for use with paper and pencil, it should not be too surprising that they can't be
used efficiently by people without paper and pencil. Let us consider whether
the estimation techniques described above can be expanded to handle these
task demands.
ESTIMATION ARITHMETIC

Fractional scientific notation. So far, the examples have discussed how to perform mental arithmetic on fractions. How can we operate mentally on any
numbers, not just decimal fractions? At secondary levels, students are taught
"scientific notation", through which all numbers, from the very small to the
very large, are expressed as a product of a number between one and ten and

E S T I M A T I O N T E C H N I Q U E S FOR A R I T H M E T I C

429

some power of ten. To multiply two numbers, the student then can multiply
the two numbers between one and ten, then add the exponents.
This use of scientific notation can provide a general technique for mental
multiplication. You can express the two numbers to be multiplied in "fractional scientific notation". Each number is converted to a fraction between
0.1 and 1.0, and a power of ten. You then multiply any two numbers by
adding the exponents, and then "serially fractionate" the two fractions. As
the first approximation to the result, you mentally add the exponents (using
Estimation addition, described below) to get the exponent of the result. This
by itself is sometimes sufficient, if the person needs only an "orders-ofmagnitude" estimate of a result.
Next, the two fractional numbers are multiplied, using the "serial fractionation" technique described above. The precision of representing the
numbers and performing the fractionation is a function of the mental effort
put into the process by the person. Rough estimates can be performed with
less mental effort than more precise estimates.

Estimation Dip&ion

Since division is the inverse of multiplication, it's not too surprising that the
estimation technique for division is the inverse of multiplication. The first step
is identical: convert the numbers to fractional scientific notation. Then the
exponent of the divisor is subtracted from the exponent of the number being
divided, using the estimation subtraction techniques described below. This
again provides an order-of-magnitude estimate, as an initial estimate of the
result.
In the second step, the two numbers are represented as relative line lengths,
and the proportion that the numerator is of the denominator is determined.
For example, suppose we wanted to estimate the price per unit quantity of
peanut butter in a supermarket. The price is $1.57 for 28 ozs. We first represent these as 0.157 x 10 to the 1 and 0.28 x 10 to the 2. So the answer will
have an exponent o f - 1. Next we represent mentally 0.157 and 0.28 as
relative line lengths:
0

-->

1
->

0.157
- > 0.28

We can now estimate that 0.157 is approximately 0.5 of 0.28. So the result
is 0.5 x 10 to the -- 1 or approximately $0.05/oz. If we were comparing a set

430

JAMES A. LEVIN

of peanut butter jars of approximately the same price range and sizes, then we
could skip the first part, and just do the division of the fractional portion.
This process may seem long, complex, and effortful, but that is, to some
extent, due to its novelty. Imagine the length and complexity of description
you would have to give to someone unfamiliar with the paper and pencil
division algorithm so that s/he could divide $1.57 by 28. Also note that neither
of the mental estimation techniques discussed so far requires knowledge of
the "times" tables (the memorization of one hundred single digit multiplication results).
Estimation Addition

As you might have suspected, there are simple techniques for doing mental
addition and subtraction as well. To add two numbers, you represent them as
relative line lengths, relative to some standard. The standard is chosen to be
some convenient quantity larger than the largest of the numbers to be added.
For example, if we want to add 43 and 256, we represent each of these as line
lengths, relative to, say 500.
0

500
>
> 256
> 43

Then we mentally translate the shorter line to the end of the longer line.
The resulting line represents the sum of 256 and 43, which we can estimate
to be approximately
>

> 300

Note that using this technique requires only the skill of converting numbers into relative line lengths (trained by the Sonar game described previously),
the skill of converting relative line lengths to numbers (trained by the Harpoon
game), and the mental skill of mental translation. There is strong psychological
evidence for the abilities of people to perform mental translation in a linear
way (Kosslyn, 1975).
Estimation Subtraction

The techniques for mental subtraction are similar to those for addition, with
the added issue of negative numbers. Subtraction of one number from another

ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES FOR ARITHMETIC

431

can be represented as the addition of a number and a negative number. That

is, 53 -- 45 can be re-expressed as 53 + (-- 45).
How, then, do we represent negative numbers in Estimation Arithmetic?
So far, we have represented numbers as relative line lengths. The positive
numbers presented so far have been directed toward the larger end of the
standard line length. Negative numbers are just relative line lengths pointed
in the other direction. So - 45 could be represented mentally as
--

<-

100

100
.>

--45<Then, subtraction is performed in the same way as Estimation Addition: the

relative line length for the second number is mentally translated to the end of
the line length for the first, and the resulting line length is the result. So,
53 --45 is represented by
--

<.

100

100
.>
953
<

45 (translated)

. - - 9 Result: 10 (approximately)
The negation operation, within this framework, is expressed very concretely as reflection across the zero point. The negation of a number represented as a relative line length can be accomplished by mentally rotating the
line length 180 degrees. There is solid psychological evidence for the ability
of people to perform mental rotation in a reliable and linear way (Cooper,
1975; Shepard & Metzler, 1971).

Individual Differences in Arithmetic Processing

The cognitive processes involved in performing arithmetic operations has
recently been studied from a number of different angles, each of which brings
out the complexity of the cognitive representation and processing, and the
variation across individuals. Shepard, Kilpatric & Cunningham (1975)have
mapped out the complex knowledge that individuals have about even the
single digit numbers. People categorize these "simple" numbers in a surprisingly large number of ways: small vs. large; even vs. odd; multiples of three vs.
powers of two.
At the other end of the spectrum, Brown, Burton, and Van Lehn have been

432

JAMES A. LEVIN

mapping out in detail the arithmetic cognitive processes (particularly place

value subtraction) (Brown & Burton, 1978; Brown & Van Lehn, in press;
Burton, 1980). They have taxonomized a large number of subtraction errors,
and developed a theory of computational "bugs" and their generation. One of
the implications of their descriptive studies of the ways that people perform
arithmetic is to highlight individual variation between the ways that people
have for carrying out the arithmetic operations.
Both for generating mathematics curricula and for constructing cognitive
theories of arithmetic, individual variation has been largely ignored in previous
work. But some of the earliest work focused in an interesting way on the
astoundingly large differences between the ways that different people think
about and operate on numbers. Galton (1907) collected "number forms" from
people, drawings that people made to express where numbers are spatially
located mentally for themselves. Most people have a strong notion of spatial
location of numbers ("ONE is up here; TWO is next to it in this direction;
THREE is below and to the r i g h t ; . . . "). The variety of number forms he collected is striking, especially given the implicit assumption underlying most
mathematics curricula that all people think about numbers and operate on
them in the same way (the "right" way). This study of "number forms" has
been carried forward recently by Petitto (1975), with much the same results: a
considerable individual variation in the ways that people think about numbers.

Implications of Individual Variation for Mathematics Instruction

We have introduced a set of techniques for performing mental addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division, all which can be performed approximately with precision dependent upon the amount of mental effort. These
techniques are based on measurement of quantity, rather than counting of
units. We have presented some ways for teaching these techniques, starting
with the underlying processes for transforming abstract numbers into mental
quantities, processes for mentally manipulating these quantities, and processes
for transforming these quantities back into numbers. These processes can form
a firm basis for further explorations of mathematics. The estimation techniques
are useful for school work, for checking the results of calculations performed
with calculator or computer. They are also useful in non-school settings, where
people need to perform computation without any external aids.
More importantly, we have examined in this paper a series of estimation
techniques as alternates to the standard algorithms for computation. Each of
these techniques has advantages over the current techniques, especially in
light of current technology for computation. The particular set of techniques

ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES FOR ARITHMETIC

433

for performing mental calculation were presented in enough detail to demonstrate that there are viable alternate techniques that we can consider, evaluating them in light o f the multiple functions served by elementary mathematics
instruction.
In light of the evidence for individual variation, perhaps the most fruitful
course will be to provide students with a wide variety o f approaches for computation, rather than any one cannonical technique. One advantage o f using
computers in mathematics instruction is that they can support a wide variety
o f approaches to manipulating numbers. Rather than reacting to the new
technology for calculation as a threat, we should consider it a valuable opportunity to reconsider the assumptions underlying the mathematics curriculum, a
chance to discard the mechanical, mind-stultifying elements that are better
turned over to dumb machines, a chance to focus on the creative qualitative'
aspects that make mathematics exciting as well as useful.
University o f California, San Diego

NOTE
i This research has been supported by The Spencer Foundation. Thanks to Randy Souviney, Margaret Riel, Marilyn Quinsaat, Andrea Petitto, Bud Mehan, and Karen Johnson
for comments on earlier drafts.

REFERENCES
Ball, W. W. R.: 1908,A Short Account o f the History o f Mathematics, Dover Publications,
New York (unabridged republication, 1960).
Brown, J. S. and Burton, R. B.: 1978, 'Diagnostic models for procedural bugs in basic
mathematical skills', Cognitive Science 2, 155-192.
Brown, J. S. and Van Lehn, K.: in press, 'Towards a generative theory of "bugs" ', In
T. E. Romberg, T. Carpenter and J. Moser (eds.), Addition and Subtraction: A Developmental Perspective, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.
Burton, R. B.: 1980, 'DEBUGGY: Diagnosis of errors in basic mathematicals skills', In
D. H. Sleeman and J. S. Brown (eds.), Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Academic Press,
London.
Cooper, L. A.: 1975, 'Mental transformation of random two-dimensional shapes', Cognitive Psychology 7, 20-43.
Dugdale, S. and Kibbey, D.: 1975, Fractions curriculum o f the Plato elementary school
mathematics project, Computer-based Education Research Laboratory, University of
Illinois, Urbana, IL.
Galton, F.: 1907, Inquiries in Human Faculty and its Development, E. P. Dutton & Co.,
New York.
Ginsburg, H.: 1977, Children's Arithmetic: The Learning Process, Van Nostrand, New
York.

434

J A M E S A. L E V I N

Kosslyn, S. M.: 1975, 'Information representation in visual images', Cognitive Psychology

7, 341-370.
Lave, J.: 1979, 'A model of mundane arithmetic problem solving', Paper presented at the
SSRC Conference on Cultural Representations of Knowledge, La JoUa, CA.
Levin, J. A. and Kareev, Y.: 1980, 'Problem solving in everyday situations', The Quarterly
Newsletter o f the Laboratory o f Comparative Human Cognition 2, 47-52.
Lopes, L. L.: 1976, 'Model-based decision and inference in stud poker', Journal of Experi.
mental Psychology: General 105,217-239.
Petitto, A. L.: 1975, Numbers in Space: Case Histories o f Three lmagers, CorneU University, Ithaca, N.Y.
Shepard, R. N., Kilpatric, D. W. and Cunning, ham, J. P.: 1975, 'The internal representation
of numbers', Cognitive Psychology 7, 82-138.
Shepard, R. N. and Metzler, J.: 1971, 'Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects',
Science 171,701-703.
Sticker, H. : 1955, How to Calculate Quickly Dover Publications, New York.