A Finger-Based Numerical Training Failed to Improve Arithmetic Skills in Kindergarten Children Beyond Effects of an Active Non-numerical Control Training

Abstract

It is widely accepted that finger and number representations are associated: many correlations (including longitudinal ones) between finger gnosis/counting and numerical/arithmetical abilities have been reported. However, such correlations do not necessarily imply causal influence of early finger-number training; even in longitudinal designs, mediating variables may be underlying such correlations. Therefore, we investigated whether there may be a causal relation by means of an extensive experimental intervention in which the impact of finger-number training on initial arithmetic skills was tested in kindergarteners to see whether they benefit from the intervention even before they start formal schooling. The experimental group received 50 training sessions altogether for 10 weeks on a daily basis. A control group received phonology training of a similar duration and intensity. All children improved in the arithmetic tasks. To our surprise and contrary to most accounts in the literature, the improvement shown by the experimental training group was not superior to that of the active control group. We discuss conceptual and methodological reasons why the finger-number training employed in this study did not increase the initial arithmetic skills beyond the unspecific effects of the control intervention.

The Botetano arithmetic method: introduction and early evidence

“…Our results raise questions for Schild et al (2020), who, following 50 training sessions over 10 weeks, found no advantages for finger arithmetic as compared to mainstream arithmetic training. In contrast, students participating in 15-20 sessions of the Botetano Method exhibit impressive results.…”

The embodiment of number knowledge in sensorimotor experience: The facts behind the questions and the questions before us

“…A longitudinal study has shown that the frequency of finger use nevertheless slowed down over timefor boys more than for girlsand was beneficial to calculation mainly during kindergarten, except in low-income children whose accuracy continued to increase with finger use till the second grade (Jordan et al, 2008). This finding, together with mixed results from training studies (Fischer, 2010;Gracia-Bafalluy & Noël, 2008;Ollivier et al, 2020;Schild et al, 2020), suggests that finger use assists mental calculation only during a limited period of time that varies with individual learning opportunities. However, other studies have revealed that finger counting experience remains imprinted in number representation throughout development and beyond.…”

Phonemic Training Modulates Early Speech Processing in Pre-reading Children

“…Here, we only focus on the conduction and the results of the two linguistic trainings. For detailed information about the numerical control training, the content of the control training and and its results, see Schild et al (2020).…”

“…Length and organization of the training for the non-linguistic control training was comparable to that of the two language groups. For more information about the training material of the control training, see Schild et al (2020).…”

“…As the non-linguistic control training served as an experimental group for a research question of its own, we also measured children's levels of finger-gnosis and basic arithmetic skills (Schild et al, 2020).…”