Individual Differences in Inhibitory Control, Not Non-Verbal Number Acuity, Correlate with Mathematics Achievement

Abstract

Given the well-documented failings in mathematics education in many Western societies, there has been an increased interest in understanding the cognitive underpinnings of mathematical achievement. Recent research has proposed the existence of an Approximate Number System (ANS) which allows individuals to represent and manipulate non-verbal numerical information. Evidence has shown that performance on a measure of the ANS (a dot comparison task) is related to mathematics achievement, which has led researchers to suggest that the ANS plays a critical role in mathematics learning. Here we show that, rather than being driven by the nature of underlying numerical representations, this relationship may in fact be an artefact of the inhibitory control demands of some trials of the dot comparison task. This suggests that recent work basing mathematics assessments and interventions around dot comparison tasks may be inappropriate.

Dot comparison stimuli are not all alike: The effect of different visual controls on ANS measurement

“…In line with the inhibition account, some studies have shown that participants perform more accurately on congruent trials, where the more numerous array also has larger visual characteristics, than incongruent trials, where the less numerous array has larger visual characteristics (Barth et al, 2006;Cappelletti et al, 2014;Gilmore et al, 2013;Hurewitz et al, 2006;Nys & Content, 2012;Szűcs et al, 2013). However, other studies have failed to find this effect (Odic et al, 2013(Odic et al, , 2014, or find the opposite congruency effect (Gebuis & Van der Smagt, 2011).…”

“…The dot array stimuli can either be presented simultaneously side-by-side (e.g. Gilmore et al, 2013), sequentially (e.g. Ansari, Lyons, van Eimeren, & Xu, 2007) or in an intermixed manner (e.g.…”

“…More recently researchers are starting to use this more comprehensive method of visual cue control (Defever, Reynvoet, & Gebuis, 2013;Gilmore et al, 2013;Szűcs, Nobes, Devine, Gabriel, & Gebuis, 2013). Some researchers also report the average dot size and the density of the dots in the arrays, however these factors are highly correlated with cumulative surface area (Gebuis & Reynvoet, 2012), and so there is no substantial benefit to examining them as separate variables.…”

“…There has been recent support for an inhibition account of performance whereby on certain incongruent trials of a dot comparison task, inhibition skills play a significant role (Fuhs & McNeil, 2013;Gilmore et al 2013;Nys and Content 2012;Szűcs et al 2013). Incongruent trials are those in which the more numerous array of the pair has smaller visual characteristics, such as cumulative surface area or convex hull.…”

“…Additionally, recent studies have found that the significant relationship between dot comparison performance and formal mathematics is moderated or even totally accounted for by inhibitory control skills (Fuhs & McNeil, 2013;Gilmore et al, 2013, Szűcs et al 2013. Put together, it seems likely that some dot comparison task trials involve the recruitment of inhibitory controls skills, and it is possible that the way in which the visual characteristics of the stimuli are controlled may influence performance.…”