Children's representation of symbolic and nonsymbolic magnitude examined with the priming paradigm

How people process and represent magnitude has often been studied using number comparison tasks. From the results of these tasks, a comparison distance effect (CDE) is generated, showing that it is easier to discriminate two numbers that are numerically further apart (e.g., 2 and 8) compared with numerically closer numbers (e.g., 6 and 8). However, it has been suggested that the CDE reflects decisional processes rather than magnitude representation. In this study, therefore, we investigated the development of symbolic and nonsymbolic number processes in kindergartners and first, second, and sixth graders using the priming paradigm. This task has been shown to measure magnitude and not decisional processes. Our findings revealed that a priming distance effect (PDE) is already present in kindergartners and that it remains stable across development. This suggests that formal schooling does not affect magnitude representation. No differences were found between the symbolic and nonsymbolic PDE, indicating that both notations are processed with comparable precision. Finally, a poorer performance on a standardized mathematics test seemed to be associated with a smaller PDE for both notations, possibly suggesting that children with lower mathematics scores have a less precise coding of magnitude. This supports the defective number module hypothesis, which assumes an impairment of number sense.     

Salience Versus Proportional Reasoning: Rethinking the Mechanism Behind Graphical Display Effects

Two experiments examined predictions from two separate explanations for previously observed display effects for communicating low‐probability risks: foreground:background salience and proportional reasoning. According to foreground:background salience, people's risk perceptions are based on the relative salience of the foreground (number of people harmed) versus the background (number of people at risk), such that calling attention to the background makes the risk seem smaller. Conversely, the proportional reasoning explanation states that what matters is whether the respondent attends to the proportion, which conveys how small the risk is. In Experiment 1, we made the background more salient via color and bolding; in contrast to the foreground:background salience prediction, this manipulation did not influence participants' risk aversion. In Experiment 2, we separately manipulated whether the foreground and the background were displayed graphically or numerically. In keeping with the proportional reasoning hypothesis, there was an interaction whereby participants given formats that displayed the foreground and background in the same modality (graphs or numbers, thereby making the proportion easier to form) saw the probability as smaller and were less risk averse than participants given the information in different modalities. There was also a main effect of displaying the background graphically, providing some support for foreground:background salience. In total, this work suggests that the proportional reasoning account provides a good explanation of many display effects related to communicating low‐probability risks, although there is some role for foreground:background salience as well. Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Numerical approximation abilities correlate with and predict informal but not formal mathematics abilities

Previous research has found a relationship between individual differences in children’s precision when nonverbally approximating quantities and their school mathematics performance. School mathematics performance emerges from both informal (e.g., counting) and formal (e.g., knowledge of mathematics facts) abilities. It remains unknown whether approximation precision relates to both of these types of mathematics abilities. In the current study, we assessed the precision of numerical approximation in 85 3- to 7-year-old children four times over a span of 2 years. In addition, at the final time point, we tested children’s informal and formal mathematics abilities using the Test of Early Mathematics Ability (TEMA-3). We found that children’s numerical approximation precision correlated with and predicted their informal, but not formal, mathematics abilities when controlling for age and IQ. These results add to our growing understanding of the relationship between an unlearned nonsymbolic system of quantity representation and the system of mathematics reasoning that children come to master through instruction.     

The role of numerosity in processing nonsymbolic proportions

The difficulty in processing fractions seems to be related to the interference between the whole-number value of the numerator and the denominator and the real value of the fraction. Here we assess whether the reported problems with symbolic fractions extend to the nonsymbolic domain, by presenting fractions as arrays of black and white dots representing the two operands. Participants were asked to compare a target array with a reference array in two separate tasks using the same stimuli: a numerosity task comparing just the number of white dots in the two arrays; and a proportion task comparing the proportion of black and white dots. The proportion task yielded lower accuracy and slower response, confirming that even with nonsymbolic stimuli accessing proportional information is relatively difficult. However, using a congruity manipulation in which the greater numerosity of white dots could co-occur with a lower proportion of them, and vice versa, it was found that both task-irrelevant dimensions would interfere with the task-relevant dimension suggesting that both numerosity and proportion information was automatically accessed. The results indicate that the magnitude of fractions can be automatically and holistically processed in the nonsymbolic domain.     

Working memory and number line representations in single-digit addition: Approximate versus exact,nonsymbolic versus symbolic

How do kindergarteners solve different single-digit addition problem formats? We administered problems that differed solely on the basis of two dimensions: response type (approximate or exact), and stimulus type (nonsymbolic, i.e., dots, or symbolic, i.e., Arabic numbers). We examined how performance differs across these dimensions, and which cognitive mechanism (mental model, transcoding, or phonological storage) underlies performance in each problem format with respect to working memory (WM) resources and mental number line representations. As expected, nonsymbolic problem formats were easier than symbolic ones. The visuospatial sketchpad was the primary predictor of nonsymbolic addition. Symbolic problem formats were harder because they either required the storage and manipulation of quantitative symbols phonologically or taxed more WM resources than their nonsymbolic counterparts. In symbolic addition, WM and mental number line results showed that when an approximate response was needed, children transcoded the information to the nonsymbolic code. When an exact response was needed, however, they phonologically stored numerical information in the symbolic code. Lastly, we found that more accurate symbolic mental number line representations were related to better performance in exact addition problem formats, not the approximate ones. This study extends our understanding of the cognitive processes underlying children's simple addition skills.     

Typical and atypical development of basic numerical skills in elementary school

Deficits in basic numerical processing have been identified as a central and potentially causal problem in developmental dyscalculia; however, so far not much is known about the typical and atypical development of such skills. This study assessed basic number skills cross-sectionally in 262 typically developing and 51 dyscalculic children in Grades 2, 3, and 4. Findings indicate that the efficiency of number processing improves over time and that dyscalculic children are generally less efficient than children with typical development. For children with typical arithmetic development, robust effects of numerical distance, size congruity, and compatibility of ten and unit digits in two-digit numbers could be identified as early as the end of Grade 2. Only the distance effect for comparing symbolic representations of numerosities changed developmentally. Dyscalculic children did not show a size congruity effect but showed a more marked compatibility effect for two-digit numbers. We did not find strong evidence that dyscalculic children process numbers qualitatively differently from children with typical arithmetic development.     

Preschoolers’ nonsymbolic arithmetic with large sets: Is addition more accurate than subtraction?

Adult and developing humans share with other animals analog magnitude representations of number that support nonsymbolic arithmetic with large sets. This experiment tested the hypothesis that such representations may be more accurate for addition than for subtraction in children as young as 3½ years of age. In these tasks, the experimenter hid two equal sets of cookies, visibly added to or subtracted from the sets, and then asked 3½-year-olds which set had more cookies. Initial set size was either large (7 or 9) or very large (18 or 30), and the final sets differed by either a high proportion (ratio of 1:2) or a low proportion (difference of 1 cookie). Children’s addition performance exceeded chance, as well as their subtraction performance, across set sizes and proportions, whereas subtraction performance did not exceed chance. Arithmetic performance was also independent of counting ability. Addition performance was remarkably accurate when ratios between outcomes were close to 1, in contrast to previous findings. Interpretations for the asymmetry between addition and subtraction are discussed with respect to the nature of representations for nonsymbolic arithmetic with large sets.     

Measuring the approximate number system

Recent theories in numerical cognition propose the existence of an approximate number system (ANS) that supports the representation and processing of quantity information without symbols. It has been claimed that this system is present in infants, children, and adults, that it supports learning of symbolic mathematics, and that correctly harnessing the system during tuition will lead to educational benefits. Various experimental tasks have been used to investigate individuals' ANSs, and it has been assumed that these tasks measure the same system. We tested the relationship across six measures of the ANS. Surprisingly, despite typical performance on each task, adult participants' performances across the tasks were not correlated, and estimates of the acuity of individuals' ANSs from different tasks were unrelated. These results highlight methodological issues with tasks typically used to measure the ANS and call into question claims that individuals use a single system to complete all these tasks.     

The mental representation of the magnitude of symbolic and nonsymbolic ratios in adults

This study mainly investigated the specificity of the processing of fraction magnitudes. Adults performed a magnitude-estimation task on fractions, the ratios of collections of dots, and the ratios of surface areas. Their performance on fractions was directly compared with that on nonsymbolic ratios. At odds with the hypothesis that the symbolic notation impedes the processing of the ratio magnitudes, the estimates were less variable and more accurate for fractions than for nonsymbolic ratios. This indicates that the symbolic notation activated a more precise mental representation than did the nonsymbolic ratios. This study also showed, for both fractions and the ratios of dot collections, that the larger the components the less precise the mental representation of the magnitude of the ratio. This effect suggests that the mental representation of the magnitude of the ratio was activated from the mental representation of the magnitude of the components and the processing of their numerical relation (indirect access). Finally, because most previous studies of fractions have used a numerical comparison task, we tested whether the mental representation of magnitude activated in the fraction-estimation task could also underlie performance in the fraction-comparison task. The subjective distance between the fractions to be compared was computed from the mean and the variability of the estimates. This distance was the best predictor of the time taken to compare the fractions, suggesting that the same approximate mental representation of the magnitude was activated in both tasks.     

The Relational SNARC: Spatial Representation of Nonsymbolic Ratios

Recent research in numerical cognition has begun to systematically detail the ability of humans and nonhuman animals to perceive the magnitudes of nonsymbolic ratios. These relationally defined analogs to rational numbers offer new potential insights into the nature of human numerical processing. However, research into their similarities with and connections to symbolic numbers remains in its infancy. The current research aims to further explore these similarities by investigating whether the magnitudes of nonsymbolic ratios are associated with space just as symbolic numbers are. In two experiments, we found that responses were faster on the left for smaller nonsymbolic ratio magnitudes and faster on the right for larger nonsymbolic ratio magnitudes. These results further elucidate the nature of nonsymbolic ratio processing, extending the literature of spatial–numerical associations to nonsymbolic relative magnitudes. We discuss potential implications of these findings for theories of human magnitude processing in general and how this general processing relates to numerical processing.