Teaching and learning of the boxplot
a systematic review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23925/1983-3156.2026.v28.e77412Keywords:
Box plot, Systematic review, Prisma, Teaching, LearningAbstract
This article presents a systematic review of empirical research published between 2010 and 2025 on the teaching and learning of boxplots. Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, documents were searched in Web of Science, Scopus, SciELO, and Dialnet (May 31, 2025) using search terms in Spanish, English, and Portuguese. After removing duplicates and applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, 19 studies were analyzed. Data were extracted and synthesized using R-4.2.2. Bibliometric results show a predominance of articles in English (74%) and a geographic focus on Belgium, Germany, and Australia. Theoretically, the area heuristic underpins 47% of the studies; while conceptual change frameworks based on refutational text plus multiple representations (MRs) proved to be the most effective intervention, although reaction times indicate that visual bias persists. Only three studies involved practicing teachers, and none evaluated effects beyond one week. It is concluded that understanding boxplots requires explicit and sustained instruction. Gaps are identified in longitudinal studies, methodological triangulation, and teacher training, which will guide future research and professional development agendas.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Abt, M., Leuders, T., Loibl, K., & Reinhold, F. (2024). Developing initial notions of variability when learning about box plots. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2024.2421412
Bakker, A., Biehler, R., & Konold, C. (2004). Should young students learn about box plots? En G. Burrill & M. Camden (Eds.), Curricular Development in Statistics Education: International Association for Statistical Education (IASE) (pp. 163-173). International Statistical Institute.
Castillo, I. (2024). Improving Statistical Literacy through Evidence-Based Strategies Among First-Year Education Students in a State University. Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 8(1), 246-259.
Chadegani, A. A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M. M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M., Farhadi, M., & Ebrahim, N. A. (2013). A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases. Asian Social Science, 9(5), 18-26. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n5p18
Gal, I. (2002). Adults’ Statistical Literacy: Meanings, Components, Responsibilities. International Statistical Review, 70(1), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-5823.2002.tb00336.x
Kim, E. M., Nabors Oláh, L., & Peters, S. (2020). A Learning Progression for Constructing and Interpreting Data Display. ETS Research Report Series, 2020(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12285
Lem, S., Kempen, G., Ceulemans, E., Onghena, P., Verschaffel, L., & Van Dooren, W. (2015). Combining Multiple External Representations and Refutational Text: An Intervention on Learning to Interpret Box Plots. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(4), 909-926. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9604-3
Lem, S., Onghena, P., Verschaffel, L., & Van Dooren, W. (2013). On the misinterpretation of histograms and box plots. Educational Psychology, 33(2), 155-174. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2012.674006
Madrid, A. E., Valenzuela-Ruiz, S. M., & Batanero, C. (2022). Interpretación del diagrama de caja por estudiantes universitarios de ciencias de la actividad física y deporte. Educación Matemática, 34(3), 275-300. https://doi.org/10.24844/EM3403.10
Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372(71), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 4.2.2). R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
RStudio Team. (2024). RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R. Posit Software, PBC.
Sánchez-Acevedo, N., Toro-Barbieri, E., & Araya-Bastias, D. (2021). Interpretación y comprensión de gráficos estadísticos por profesores de Matemáticas en formación. Revista Chilena de Educación Matemática, 13(4), 230-243. https://doi.org/10.46219/rechiem.v13i4.86
Videla-Jiménez, P., Ruz, F., & López-Martín, M.M. (2025). Research on box plot knowledge in statistical education: a systematic review of the literature. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 40, 141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-025-01048-z
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Saddo Ag Almouloud
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in EMP agree to the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
- NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.
Licenciada com a Licença 