No abstract

Various measures have been used to investigate number processing in children, including a number comparison or a number line estimation task. The present study aimed to examine whether and to which extent these different measures of number representation are related to performance on a curriculum-based standardized mathematics achievement test in kindergarteners, first, second, and sixth graders. Children completed a number comparison task and a number line estimation task with a balanced set of symbolic (Arabic digits) and non-symbolic (dot patterns) stimuli. Associations with mathematics achievement were observed for the symbolic measures. Although the association with number line estimation was consistent over grades, the association with number comparison was much stronger in kindergarten compared to the other grades. The current data indicate that a good knowledge of the numerical meaning of Arabic digits is important for children's mathematical development and that particularly the access to the numerical meaning of symbolic digits rather than the representation of number per se is important.

The relation between the approximate number system (ANS) and symbolic number processing skills remains unclear. Some theories assume that children acquire the numerical meaning of symbols by mapping them onto the preexisting ANS. Others suggest that in addition to the ANS, children also develop a separate, exact representational system for symbolic number processing. In the current study, we contribute to this debate by investigating whether the nonsymbolic number processing of kindergarteners is predictive for symbolic number processing. Results revealed no association between the accuracy of the kindergarteners on a nonsymbolic number comparison task and their performance on the symbolic comparison task six months later, suggesting that there are two distinct representational systems for the ANS and numerical symbols.

Digit order processing is highly related to individual differences in arithmetic performance. To examine whether serial scanning or associative mechanisms underlie order processing, order tasks (i.e. deciding whether three digits were presented in an order or not) were administered in two experiments. In the first experiment, digits were presented in different directions namely ascending, descending and non-ordered. For each direction, close and far distance sequences were presented. Results revealed reversed distance effects for ordered sequences, but ascending sequences elicited faster performance and stronger reversed distance effects than descending sequences, suggesting that associative mechanisms underlie order processing. In the second experiment, it was examined to which extent the relation between order processing and arithmetic is number-specific by presenting order tasks with digits, letters and months. In all order tasks similar distance effects were observed and similar relations with arithmetic were found, suggesting that both general associative mechanisms and number-specific mechanisms contribute to arithmetic.

Recently, a lot of studies in the domain of numerical cognition have been published demonstrating a robust association between numerical symbol processing and individual differences in mathematics achievement. Because numerical symbols are so important for mathematics achievement, many researchers want to provide an answer on the ‘symbol grounding problem,’ i.e., how does a symbol acquires its numerical meaning? The most popular account, the approximate number system (ANS) mapping account, assumes that a symbol acquires its numerical meaning by being mapped on a non-verbal and ANS. Here, we critically evaluate four arguments that are supposed to support this account, i.e., (1) there is an evolutionary system for approximate number processing, (2) non-symbolic and symbolic number processing show the same behavioral effects, (3) non-symbolic and symbolic numbers activate the same brain regions which are also involved in more advanced calculation and (4) non-symbolic comparison is related to the performance on symbolic mathematics achievement tasks. Based on this evaluation, we conclude that all of these arguments and consequently also the mapping account are questionable. Next we explored less popular alternative, where small numerical symbols are initially mapped on a precise representation and then, in combination with increasing knowledge of the counting list result in an independent and exact symbolic system based on order relations between symbols. We evaluate this account by reviewing evidence on order judgment tasks following the same four arguments. Although further research is necessary, the available evidence so far suggests that this symbol–symbol association account should be considered as a worthy alternative of how symbols acquire their meaning.

Digit comparison is strongly related to individual differences in children's arithmetic ability. Why this is the case, however, remains unclear to date. Therefore, we investigated the relative contribution of three possible cognitive mechanisms in first and second graders' digit comparison performance: digit identification, digit-number word matching and digit ordering ability. Furthermore, we examined whether these components could account for the well-established relation between digit comparison performance and arithmetic. As expected, all candidate predictors were related to digit comparison in both age groups. Moreover, in first graders, digit ordering and in second graders both digit identification and digit ordering explained unique variance in digit comparison performance. However, when entering these unique predictors of digit comparison into a mediation model with digit comparison as predictor and arithmetic as outcome, we observed that whereas in second graders digit ordering was a full mediator, in first graders this was not the case. For them, the reverse was true and digit comparison fully mediated the relation between digit ordering and arithmetic. These results suggest that between first and second grade, there is a shift in the predictive value for arithmetic from cardinal processing and procedural knowledge to ordinal processing and retrieving declarative knowledge from memory; a process which is possibly due to a change in arithmetic strategies at that age. A video abstract of this article can be viewed at: https://youtu.be/dDB0IGi2Hf8.

No abstract

No abstract