Prematurity and overlap between reading and arithmetic: The cognitive mechanisms behind the association

Abstract

It is well-known that very preterm children perform at lower levels than full-term children in reading and arithmetic at school. Whether the lower performance levels of preterm children in these two separate domains have the same or different origins, however, is not clear. The present study examined the extent to which prematurity is associated with the overlap (i.e., common variance) of reading and arithmetic among Finnish school beginners. We also examined the extent to which the association of prematurity with the overlap between reading and arithmetic is due to different prereading skills, basic number skills, and general cognitive abilities. The participants (age 6-7) consisted of 193 very preterm children (< 32 weeks of gestation or birth weight < 1501 g) and 175 full-term control children assessed at the beginning of Grade 1. The results showed that about 40% of the variation in reading and arithmetic skills was common to these two domains and thus, represented the overlap between reading and arithmetic. Prematurity was found to be negatively associated with the overlapping part of reading and arithmetic skills. This association was explained particularly by differences between very preterm and full-term children in prereading (letter knowledge, phonological awareness, and rapid automatized naming) and basic number skills (counting sequence knowledge): Very preterm children showed lower levels of phonological awareness, letter knowledge, counting, and rapid serial naming than full-term children and thus, also demonstrated lower skill level common for reading and arithmetic. Early screening of very preterm children according to the cognitive antecedents that predict the overlap between reading and arithmetic is needed to prevent comorbid difficulties in these domains.

Predictors of Children’s Early Numeracy: Environmental Variables, Intergenerational Pathways, and Children’s Cognitive, Linguistic, and Non-symbolic Number Skills

“…In addition, the present study also gives useful insight into the relationship between linguistic and numeracy skills. As expected, there was a significant relationship between mean language scores and recognition and reading of digits (Purpura and Ganley, 2014;Korpipää et al, 2019), with phonological awareness playing a relevant role. Contrasting results were found regarding the relationship between phonological awareness and mathematical skills, and some authors have suggested that it might not be constant across development (Passolunghi et al, 2015).…”

“…However, there are contrasting results to this regard (for a review, see De Smedt et al, 2013), and some authors suggest that symbolic representation is more strictly related to mathematical achievements (Göbel et al, 2014;Goffin and Ansari, 2019). This is in line with the strong relationship found between math skills and language development (e.g., Korpipää et al, 2019), supporting the idea that language competence may act as a scaffolding ability on which numerical development may rely . In terms of linguistic skills, the verbal code proposed within the Triple Code Model (Dehaene, 1992(Dehaene, , 1997 was used in particular for counting, addition, and easy multiplication.…”

Developmental dynamics between reading and math in elementary school

“…These factors have been, in part, explored in other important work (e.g., Cirino, Childs, & Macdonald, 2018;Koponen et al, 2019;Korpipää et al, 2019). We controlled for one such factor, nonverbal cognitive abilities.…”

“…Although there is scant research on the developmental dynamics between reading and math, clues regarding the direction of the developmental effects may be drawn from a line of research that studies reading and math in conjunction. One line of studies have found that reading and math are correlated, however with no direct time‐dependent relations (e.g., Koponen, Aunola, Ahonen, & Nurmi, 2007; Koponen et al., 2019; Korpipää et al., 2017; Korpipää et al., 2019). This view is supported by the investment theory (Cattell, 1987).…”

“…According to the investment theory, reading and math are expected to be positively correlated because they have a common underlying cognitive factor. Empirical literature showing reading and math sharing common domain‐general cognitive correlates, such as working memory, processing speed, rapid automatized naming, reasoning, and serial retrieval fluency is abundant (e.g., Fuchs, Geary, Fuchs, Compton, & Hamlett, 2016; Koponen et al., 2007; Koponen et al., 2019; Korpipää et al., 2017; Korpipää et al., 2019; Vanbinst et al., 2020).…”