Neither numerosity processing nor figure matching predicts general mathematical achievement¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2015 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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? In hierarchical regressions, neither numerosity comparison nor figure matching was a significant predictor of curriculum-based general mathematical achievement for any grade. → Zhou X 2015
Evidence¶
Zhou X 2015¶
Zhou X, Wei W, Zhang Y, Cui J, and Chen C (2015) Visual perception can account for the close relation between numerosity processing and computational fluency. Front. Psychol. 6:1364. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01364
q3 · i? · associational · r2
Hierarchical multiple regression predicting curriculum-based mathematical achievement scores showed no significant contribution of numerosity comparison or figure matching beyond general cognitive factors. The article reports "Neither numerosity processing nor figure matching ability was significant in the regression equations for gene ral mathematical achievement."
"Figure matching ability accounted for a unique portion of the variance of computationa l fluency. Neither numerosity processing nor figure matching ability was significant in the regression equations for gene ral mathematical achievement."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- General Cognitive Ability — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
- Visual Processing — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
Related Claims¶
- Behavioral nonsymbolic numerosity acuity (RT and accuracy ratio effects) does not reliably predict formal math achievement in typical to high-achieving participants aged 6 to 34 — related
- Numerosity comparison accuracy is ratio-dependent across grades three to five — related
- Figure-matching ability accounts for the association between numerosity processing and computational fluency in third- to fifth-grade children — related
- Figure-matching ability correlates more strongly with numerosity processing and computational fluency than other cognitive factors — related
- General processing speed (choice reaction time and figure matching) does not significantly predict mathematics achievement in Grade 7 or Grade 9 — related
- Fall RRRP Part 1 predicted spring Applied Problems mathematics scores and gains, but did not predict spring Math Fluency — related
- Kindergarten visual processing uniquely predicts grade-one early mathematics after controlling for prior mathematics and general cognitive abilities — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
numerosity-figure-matching-not-predict-math-achievement |
title |
Neither numerosity processing nor figure matching predicts general mathematical achievement |
description |
Neither numerosity processing nor figure matching predicts general mathematical achievement |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2015 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — zhou-x-2015 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.