site icon

How and why mathematicians read proofs: A qualitative exploratory study and a quantitative confirmatory study

If any information below is incorrect, please login and use the links below to correct it

Temporary image of the file type

PROCEEDINGS OF THE 15TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE ON RESEARCH IN UNDERGRADUATE MATHEMATICS EDUCATION (Vol 2)

2012

Portland, Oregon

How and why mathematicians read proofs: A qualitative exploratory study and a quantitative confirmatory study

Page: 2-268

In this paper, we report the results of a qualitative study in which we interviewed nine mathematicians about how and why they read the published proofs of their colleagues. We then tested the hypotheses generated from these analyses with a quantitative study with 112 mathematicians. Key results from these studies are (a) mathematicians do not always read a proof to obtain conviction, but usually do so to find techniques that might be useful in their own research, (b) mathematicians use authoritative evidence to gain conviction in the proofs that they read, (c) some mathematicians do not always check every line in a proof, even when they referee, and (d) the consideration of examples was crucial in gaining understanding and conviction.

Editors may log in and edit entries here with permissions.