Most interviewed mathematicians said the author of a deductive argument influences how they read it, and surveyed referees were split on trusting authoritative sources¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r1 · q1–q2
Currency · newest study 2013 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? Six of eight interviewed mathematicians claimed the author of a deductive argument would influence how they read it. → Keith Weber 2013 q2 i? Among 54 mathematicians with refereeing experience, 39% agreed and 41% disagreed that they trust authoritative sources when refereeing proofs. → Keith Weber 2013 (2)

Evidence¶

Keith Weber 2013¶

Keith Weber, Matthew Inglis & Juan Pablo Mejia-Ramos. (2013). How mathematicians obtain conviction: Implications for mathematics instruction and research on epistemic cognition. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.865527

q1 · i? · qualitative · r?

Task-based interview study by Weber with eight mathematicians evaluating eight purported proofs plus open-ended questions about determining validity. "Six of the eight mathematicians claimed that it would"; the article notes this corroborates Muller-Hill's claims.

"One question asked if the author of the deductive argument that they were reading would influence how they read the argument. Six of the eight mathematicians claimed that it would."

Keith Weber 2013 (2)¶

Keith Weber, Matthew Inglis & Juan Pablo Mejia-Ramos. (2013). How mathematicians obtain conviction: Implications for mathematics instruction and research on epistemic cognition. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.865527

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Survey of 54 mathematicians experienced in refereeing manuscripts, asking whether they feel confident a proof is correct because a trusted authoritative source wrote it. The article reports the response was mixed: 39% agreed, 41% disagreed; no effect size is printed.

"The response to this survey item was mixed; 39% of the surveyed mathematicians agreed with it while 41% disagreed with it"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• An argument's named authoritative author increased mathematicians' persuasiveness ratings, but the authority effect vanished for deductive proofs — related
• A majority of surveyed mathematicians report believing proofs are correct because of journal publication, journal quality, or a trusted authoritative source — related
• Mathematicians accept published proofs as correct without personally verifying them, and often read proofs to increase understanding rather than to check correctness — related