[ Original Article ]
Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics - Vol. 31, No. 2, pp.179-210
ISSN: 2288-7733 (Print) 2288-8357 (Online)
Print publication date 31 May 2021
Received 01 Apr 2021 Revised 26 Apr 2021 Accepted 29 Apr 2021

# Introduction of Conditional Probability with the Relative Frequency Approach: Focus on the Use of the Frequency Tree Diagram and Simulation

Inyong Choi
Teacher, Hansung Science High School, South Korea

Correspondence to: Inyong Choi, Email: naru84@gmail.com

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

## Abstract

The purpose of this study is to propose and discuss the pedagogical idea of introducing conditional probability with the relative frequency approach. This study developed a learning activity and simulation using the frequency tree diagram and implemented them. The first-year high school students (n=14) were able to construct the concept of conditional probability through a frequency perspective of sequentially obtaining the conditional relative frequency, the limit of the relative frequency, and the theoretical probability. The implications for teaching and curriculum were presented.

## Keywords:

conditional probability, relative frequency approach, natural frequency, tree diagram, simulation

## References

• Batanero, C., & Borovcnik, M. (2016). Statistics and probability in high school. Springer. [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-624-8]
• Batanero, C., & Sanchez, E. (2005). What is the Nature of High School Students’ Conceptions and Misconceptions About Probability?. In Exploring probability in school (pp. 241-266). Springer, Boston, MA. [https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-24530-8_11]
• Biehler, R. (1991). Computers in probability education. Chance encounters: Probability in education, 169-211. [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3532-0_6]
• Binder, K., Krauss, S., & Bruckmaier, G. (2015). Effects of visualizing statistical information–an empirical study on tree diagrams and 2×2 tables. Frontiers in psychology, 6, 1186. [https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01186]
• Borovcnik, M. (2012). Multiple perspectives on the concept of conditional probability. Avances de Investigación en Educación Matemática, (2). [https://doi.org/10.35763/aiem.v1i2.32]
• Borovcnik, M., & Bentz, H. J. (1991). Empirical research in understanding probability. In Chance encounters: Probability in education (pp. 73-105). Springer, Dordrecht. [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3532-0_3]
• Chance, B., Ben-Zvi, D., Garfield, J., & Medina, E. (2007). The role of technology in improving student learning of statistics. Technology Innovations in Statistics Education, 1(1).
• Chaput, B., Girard, J. C., & Henry, M. (2011). Frequentist approach: Modelling and simulation in statistics and probability teaching. In Teaching Statistics in school mathematics-Challenges for teaching and teacher education (pp. 85-95). Springer, Dordrecht. [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1131-0_12]
• Cho, C. M. (2010). A Study on Conditional Probability. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 20(1), 1-20.
• Choi, I. Y. & Cho, H. H. (2017). An Anaylsis of Middle School Student’s Eye Movements in the Law of Large Numbers Simulation Activity. The Mathematical Education, 56(3), 281-300.
• Díaz, C., & Batanero, C. (2009). University students’ knowledge and biases in conditional probability reasoning. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 4(3), 131-162.
• Eichler, A., & Vogel, M. (2014). Three approaches for modelling situations with randomness. In Probabilistic thinking (pp. 75-99). Springer, Dordrecht. [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7155-0_4]
• Falk, R. (1986). Conditional probabilities: insights and difficulties. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Teaching Statistics (pp. 292-297).
• Finzer, W., Erickson, T., & Binker, J. (2000), Fathom. Key Curriculum Press.
• Fischbein, H. (1987). Intuition in science and mathematics: An educational approach (Vol. 5). Springer Science & Business Media.
• Fischbein, E., & Gazit, A. (1984). Does the teaching of probability improve probabilistic intuitions?. Educational studies in mathematics, 15(1), 1-24. [https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00380436]
• Fischbein, E., & Schnarch, D. (1997). Brief report: The evolution with age of probabilistic, intuitively based misconceptions. Journal for research in mathematics education, 28(1), 96-105. [https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.28.1.0096]
• Gigerenzer, G., & Hoffrage, U. (1995). How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: frequency formats. Psychological review, 102(4), 684. [https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.4.684]
• Gras, R., & Totohasina, A. (1995). Chronologie et causalité, conceptions sources d’obstacles épistémologiques a la notion de probabilité conditionnelle. Recherches en didactique des mathématiques (Revue), 15(1), 49-95.
• Ireland, S., & Watson, J. (2009). Building a connection between experimental and theoretical aspects of probability. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 4(3), 339-370.
• Jones, G. A., Langrall, C. W., Thornton, C. A., & Mogill, A. T. (1999). Students’ probabilistic thinking in instruction. Journal for research in mathematics education, 487-519. [https://doi.org/10.2307/749771]
• Kolmogorov, A. N. (1956). Foundations of the theory of probability.
• Konold, C., & Kazak, S. (2008). Reconnecting data and chance. Technology innovations in statistics education, 2(1).
• Kim, W. K., Lim, S. H., Kim, D. H., Kang, S. J., Cho, M. S., Bang, K. S., Yoon, J. K., Shin, J. H., Kim, K. T., Park, H. J., Sim,J. S., Oh, H. J., Lee, D. K., Jung, J. H., & Heo, N. K. (2018). Probability and Statistics. Seoul: Bi-Sang Edu.
• Ku, N., Tak, B., Choi, I., & Kang, H-Y. (2019). An analysis of preservice mathematics teachers’ reading of curriculum materials: Focused on conditional probability. The Mathematical Education, 58(3), 347-365.
• Ku, N., Tak, B., Choi, I., & Kang, H-Y. (2020). An Analysis of Inservice Mathematics Teachers’ Reading of Curriculum Materials: Focused on Conditional Probability. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 30(3), 487-508. [https://doi.org/10.29275/jerm.2020.08.30.3.487]
• Lee, J. Y. (2005). Study on the understanding of conditional probability concept (Masters dissertation). Seoul National University, Seoul.
• Lee, J. Y., Choi, B. R., Kim, D. J., Jeon, C., Chang, H. S., Sogn, Y. H., Song, J., & Kim, S. C. (2018). Probability and Statistics. Seoul: Chun-Jae textbook.
• Lee, J. Y. & Woo, J. H. (2009). A Didactic Anaylsis of Conditional Probability. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 19(2), 233-256.
• Lee, Y. K. & Cho, J. S. (2015). An Anaylsis on Abduction Type in the Activities Expol ring ‘Law of Large Numbers’. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 25(3), 323-345.
• Maxara, C., & Biehler, R. (2006, July). Students’ probabilistic simulation and modeling competence after a computer-intensive elementary course in statistics and probability. In Proceeding of the Seventh International Conference on the Teaching of Statistics (pp. 1-6).
• McDowell, M., & Jacobs, P. (2017). Meta-analysis of the effect of natural frequencies on Bayesian reasoning. Psychological bulletin, 143(12), 1273. [https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000126]
• Ministry of Education. (2015). Mathematics curriculum. Ministry of Education Notice, No. 2015-74 [Separate issue 8].
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
• Pollatsek, A., Well, A. D., Konold, C., Hardiman, P., & Cobb, G. (1987). Understanding conditional probabilities. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 40(2), 255-269. [https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(87)90015-X]
• Sedlmeier, P., & Gigerenzer, G. (2001). Teaching Bayesian reasoning in less than two hours. Journal of experimental psychology: general, 130(3), 380. [https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.130.3.380]
• Shaughnessy, J. M. (1992). Research in probability and statistics: Reflections and directions.
• Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Stohl, H., & Tarr, J. E. (2002). Developing notions of inference using probability simulation tools. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21(3), 319-337. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(02)00132-3]
• Tarr, J. E., & Lannin, J. K. (2005). How can teachers build notions of conditional probability and independence?. In Exploring Probability in School (pp. 215-238). Springer, Boston, MA. [https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-24530-8_10]
• Tarr, J. E., & Jones, G. A. (1997). A framework for assessing middle school students’ thinking in conditional probability and independence. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 9(1), 39-59. [https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217301]
• Tomlinson, S., & Quinn, R. (1997). Understanding conditional probability. Teaching Statistics, 19, 2-7. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9639.1997.tb00309.x]
• Watson, J. (2005). The probabilistic reasoning of middle school students. In Exploring probability in school (pp. 145-169). Springer, Boston, MA. [https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-24530-8_7]
• Watson, J. M. (2013). Statistical literacy at school: Growth and goals. Routledge. [https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203053898]
• Watson, J. M., & Kelly, B. A. (2007). The development of conditional probability reasoning. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 38(2), 213-235. [https://doi.org/10.1080/00207390601002880]
• Watson, J. M., & Moritz, J. B. (2002). School tsudents’ reasoning about conjunction and conditional events. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 33(1), 59-84. [https://doi.org/10.1080/00207390110087615]
• Wilensky, U. (1997). What is normal anyway? Therapy for epistemological anxiety. Educational studies in mathematics, 33(2), 171-202. [https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002935313957]
• Woo, J. H. (2017). Educational Foundation of School Mathematics (3). Seoul: Seoul National University Publishing Co.
• Woo, J. H., Jung, Y. Y., Park, K. M., Lee, K. H., Kim, N. H., Na, K. S., & Yim, J. H. (2006R). Research methodology in mathematics education. Seoul: KyungMoonSa.
• Yáñez, G. (2002). Students’ difficulties and strategies in solving conditional probability problems with computational simulation.
• Zhu, L., & Gigerenzer, G. (2006). Children can solve Bayesian problems: The role of representation in mental computation. Cognition, 98(3), 287-308. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004.12.003]