Standardised and non-standardised VSWM measures perform equally in relating VSWM to mathematics performance¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Mean effect sizes did not differ significantly between studies using standardised (mean = 0.40) versus non-standardised (mean = 0.38) VSWM measures. → Katie Allen & Steve Higgins & John Adams 2019

Evidence¶

Katie Allen & Steve Higgins & John Adams 2019¶

Katie Allen & Steve Higgins & John Adams. (2019). The Relationship between Visuospatial Working Memory and Mathematical Performance in School-Aged Children: a Systematic Review. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09470-8

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Subsection analysis comparing standardised versus non-standardised VSWM measures across the 35 studies; the difference was non-significant, and no significant relationship with sample size was found either.

"The mean effect size for studies using a standardised measure was higher, but not statistically significantly so, than that found for those using non-standardised measures (mean = 0.40 and mean = 0.38, respectively; t(33) = 0.212, p = 0.833)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Participant age shows no significant correlation with VSWM–mathematics effect sizes — related
• Studies using a standardised mathematics measure yield significantly larger VSWM–mathematics effect sizes — related
• Type of VSWM assessed (simultaneous, sequential, or both) shows only a marginally non-significant influence on effect sizes — related
• VSWM shows an overall positive relationship with mathematics performance in school-aged children — a broader claim this one bears on
• Smaller sample sizes are associated with larger VSWM–mathematics effect sizes — related