Claims

The relation between low numerosity and low math achievement is inconsistent across struggling profiles

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? Different small classes showed low achievement with low non-symbolic approximation only, low achievement with low symbolic approximation only, or average achievement with low non-symbolic approximation. → Hart 2015

Evidence

Hart 2015

Hart, Sara A.; Logan, Jessica A.R.; Thompson, Lee; Kovas, Yulia; McLoughlin, Gráinne; & Petrill, Stephen A. (2015). A latent profile analysis of math achievement, numerosity, and math anxiety in twins. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000045

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Three small LPA classes (classes 1, 2, 3; n = 18, 17, 29) each showed a different combination of numerosity deficit and achievement level, indicating the numerosity-achievement link is not uniform across struggling children.

"Some children showed low achievement with low non-symbolic number approximation only, others showed low achievement with low symbolic number approximation only, and finally some children showed average achievement with low non-symbolic number approximation."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-25
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.