Reaction times showed significant main effects of presentation format and numerical distance, but no main effect of magnitude¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Problems were solved faster in the subtraction format (9916 ms) than the addition format (10623 ms), and large-distance problems (8235 ms) faster than small-distance problems (12304 ms); the magnitude main effect was not significant, F(1, 43) = 1.42, p = .24. → Peters 2014

Evidence¶

Peters 2014¶

Peters, G., De Smedt, B., Torbeyns, J., Verschaffel, L., & Ghesquière, P. (2014). Subtraction by addition in children with mathematical learning disabilities. Learning and Instruction, 30, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.11.001

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Repeated measures ANOVA on 2758 trials from 44 children with MLD. Significant effects of format, F(1, 43) = 4.60, p = .04, and distance, F(1, 43) = 126.61, p < .01; no effect size was printed.

"Problems were solved faster in the traditional subtraction format (9916 ms) compared to the addition format (10623 ms), and large-distance problems, such as 83 − 4 = . or 79 + . = 83, were solved faster (8235 ms) than small-distance problems, such as 84 − 38 = . or 46 + . = 84 (12304 ms)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• MLD children switch between direct subtraction and subtraction by addition only when the numerical distance between subtrahend and difference is large — related
• Children with MLD switch between direct subtraction and subtraction by addition based on the magnitude of the subtrahend when solving two-digit subtractions — related
• MLD children's accuracy was low overall and varied by problem type and presentation format — related