TY - JOUR
T1 - Nonsymbolic and symbolic magnitude comparison skills as longitudinal predictors of mathematical achievement
AU - Xenidou-Dervou, Iro
AU - Molenaar, Dylan
AU - Ansari, Daniel
AU - van der Schoot, Menno
AU - van Lieshout, Ernest C. D. M.
PY - 2017/8
Y1 - 2017/8
N2 - What developmental roles do nonsymbolic (e.g., dot arrays) and symbolic (i.e., Arabic numerals) magnitude comparison skills play in children's mathematics? We assessed a large sample in kindergarten, grade 1 and 2 on two well-known nonsymbolic and symbolic magnitude comparison measures. We also assessed children's initial IQ and developing Working Memory (WM) capacities. Results demonstrated that symbolic and nonsymbolic comparison had different developmental trajectories; the first underwent larger developmental improvements. Both skills were longitudinal predictors of children's future mathematical achievement above and beyond IQ and WM. Nonsymbolic comparison was moderately predictive only in kindergarten. Symbolic comparison, however, was a robust and consistent predictor of future mathematics across all three years. It was a stronger predictor compared to nonsymbolic, and its predictive power at the early stages was even comparable to that of IQ. Furthermore, the present results raise several methodological implications regarding the role of different types of magnitude comparison measures.
AB - What developmental roles do nonsymbolic (e.g., dot arrays) and symbolic (i.e., Arabic numerals) magnitude comparison skills play in children's mathematics? We assessed a large sample in kindergarten, grade 1 and 2 on two well-known nonsymbolic and symbolic magnitude comparison measures. We also assessed children's initial IQ and developing Working Memory (WM) capacities. Results demonstrated that symbolic and nonsymbolic comparison had different developmental trajectories; the first underwent larger developmental improvements. Both skills were longitudinal predictors of children's future mathematical achievement above and beyond IQ and WM. Nonsymbolic comparison was moderately predictive only in kindergarten. Symbolic comparison, however, was a robust and consistent predictor of future mathematics across all three years. It was a stronger predictor compared to nonsymbolic, and its predictive power at the early stages was even comparable to that of IQ. Furthermore, the present results raise several methodological implications regarding the role of different types of magnitude comparison measures.
KW - Approximate number system
KW - Cognitive development
KW - Mathematical cognition
KW - Nonsymbolic magnitude comparison
KW - Symbolic magnitude comparison
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85007305725&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85007305725&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.11.001
DO - 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.11.001
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85007305725
SN - 0959-4752
VL - 50
SP - 1
EP - 13
JO - Learning and Instruction
JF - Learning and Instruction
ER -
