Nonsymbolic and symbolic magnitude comparison skills as longitudinal predictors of mathematical achievement

Iro Xenidou-Dervou, Dylan Molenaar, Daniel Ansari, Menno van der Schoot, Ernest C. D. M. van Lieshout

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

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.

LanguageEnglish
Pages1-13
Number of pages13
JournalLearning and Instruction
Volume50
Early online date28 Nov 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2017

Fingerprint

Mathematics
Short-Term Memory
kindergarten
mathematics
school grade

Keywords

  • Approximate number system
  • Cognitive development
  • Mathematical cognition
  • Nonsymbolic magnitude comparison
  • Symbolic magnitude comparison

Cite this

@article{b8d18f3ef1bb4da98143fa4298c487a1,
title = "Nonsymbolic and symbolic magnitude comparison skills as longitudinal predictors of mathematical achievement",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "Approximate number system, Cognitive development, Mathematical cognition, Nonsymbolic magnitude comparison, Symbolic magnitude comparison",
author = "Iro Xenidou-Dervou and Dylan Molenaar and Daniel Ansari and {van der Schoot}, Menno and {van Lieshout}, {Ernest C. D. M.}",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.11.001",
language = "English",
volume = "50",
pages = "1--13",
journal = "Learning and Instruction",
issn = "0959-4752",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

Nonsymbolic and symbolic magnitude comparison skills as longitudinal predictors of mathematical achievement. / Xenidou-Dervou, Iro; Molenaar, Dylan; Ansari, Daniel; van der Schoot, Menno; van Lieshout, Ernest C. D. M.

In: Learning and Instruction, Vol. 50, 08.2017, p. 1-13.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

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

VL - 50

SP - 1

EP - 13

JO - Learning and Instruction

T2 - Learning and Instruction

JF - Learning and Instruction

SN - 0959-4752

ER -