In Experiment 1, abstract representations produced better symbol learning than multiple concrete representations, but only for children who completed the concrete condition first¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 A significant condition by order interaction meant the abstract advantage appeared only in the group who completed the multiple-concrete condition first. → Amy Bennett 2018

Evidence¶

Amy Bennett 2018¶

Amy Bennett, Matthew Inglis and Camilla Gilmore. (2018). The Cost of Multiple Representations: Learning Number Symbols with Abstract and Concrete Representations. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000318

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

A 2x2 ANCOVA on Experiment 1 accuracy (condition within-subjects, order between-subjects, age covariate) found "a significant condition by order interaction effect" with partial η² = .095. For the concrete-first group, abstract scores were significantly higher, t(35) = 3.361, p = .002.

"This revealed a significant condition by order interaction effect, F(1, 71) = 7.43, p = .008, p2 = .095"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Learning number symbols from multiple concrete representations carries a cost compared with consistent single representations, whether concrete or abstract — related
• Children can learn the meanings of novel number symbols through an artificial symbol learning paradigm, performing above chance on a subsequent symbolic comparison task — related
• A systematic review argues that concrete materials aid mathematics and science learning when they are explicitly and gradually connected to the abstract symbols they represent — related
• The abstract advantage stems from the use of multiple representations rather than concreteness itself: single concrete and abstract conditions did not differ, and both outperformed multiple concrete representations — related