No evidence for phase-crossover effects predicted by flexible models¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Linguistic difficulty and abilities did not affect the second solution phase, and mathematical difficulty and abilities did not affect the first solution phase, contrary to flexible-model predictions. → Strohmaier 2025

Evidence¶

Strohmaier 2025¶

Strohmaier, A. R., Schons, C., Knabbe, A., Vogel, M., Saado, K., & Obersteiner, A. (2025). The relation between text comprehension and computation in mathematical word-problem solving. Learning and Instruction, 101, 102235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102235

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Null finding from the linear mixed models in this eye-tracking experiment (n = 47); Table 2 shows non-significant estimates (e.g., numerical difficulty first-phase text p = .389; lexical difficulty second phase p = .171). No effect sizes printed for these tests.

"Contrary to the prediction of flexible models, we did not find evidence for phase crossover effects, such that linguistic problem difficulty or abilities would affect the second solution phase, or that mathematical problem difficulty or abilities would affect the first solution phase."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Numerical difficulty and mathematical abilities also affect attention on situational text in the second phase (attention-crossover supporting integrated models) — related
• Linguistic problem difficulty and lower linguistic abilities increase attention on situational text during the first solution phase of word-problem solving — related
• Numerical problem difficulty and lower mathematical abilities increase attention on numbers during the second solution phase — related