A majority of surveyed mathematicians report believing proofs are correct because of journal publication, journal quality, or a trusted authoritative source¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2013 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Most of 118 surveyed research-active mathematicians agreed that publication in a journal, journal quality, or a trusted authority increased their confidence that a proof is correct. → Keith Weber 2013

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

q2 · i? · associational · r1

A survey of 118 research-active mathematicians (Mejia-Ramos & Weber) asked agreement on five-point Likert items about sources of confidence in proofs. The authors report "72% of the participants agreed with C1" and 83% agreed with C3; no effect size is printed.

"We found that 72% of the participants agreed with C1 (12% disagreed), 67% agreed with C2 (17% disagreed), and 83% agreed with C3 (7% disagreed)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Most interviewed mathematicians said the author of a deductive argument influences how they read it, and surveyed referees were split on trusting authoritative sources — related
• Mathematicians accept published proofs as correct without personally verifying them, and often read proofs to increase understanding rather than to check correctness — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• An argument's named authoritative author increased mathematicians' persuasiveness ratings, but the authority effect vanished for deductive proofs — related
• Authority figures do not increase persuasion for formal proofs, regardless of proof complexity or author eminence — reports the opposite
• Knowing an argument was written by an expert mathematician increases reported persuasion for a heuristic argument among both students and researchers — related
• Authority effects on heuristic and visual arguments persist when instructions push participants toward evaluating conviction, ruling out an instruction-interpretation artifact — related