Children with MLD and LA are less accurate than TA children on symbolic but not non-symbolic approximate addition¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 TA children solved symbolic approximate addition more accurately than children with LA (d = 1.19) and MLD (d = 1.14), while no group differences appeared on the non-symbolic task. → Bert De Smedt 2011

Evidence¶

Bert De Smedt 2011¶

Bert De Smedt, Camilla K. Gilmore. (2011). Defective number module or impaired access? Numerical magnitude processing in first graders with mathematical difficulties. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 108, 278–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2010.09.003

q3 · i3 · associational · r2

Repeated measures ANOVA on accuracy in symbolic and non-symbolic approximate addition after excluding below-chance performers. The "group × task interaction was also significant"; TA children outperformed LA and MLD only on the symbolic task, with no group differences on the non-symbolic task.

"There was a main effect of group (F(2,60) = 7.09, p < .01, ηp² = .19) and the group × task interaction was also significant (F(2,60) = 5.05, p < .01, ηp² = .05) (Figure 3). Post-hoc t-tests revealed that TA children performed significantly more accurately on the symbolic tasks than children with LA (t(47) = 4.11, p < .01, d = 1.19) and children with MLD (t(43) = 3.50, p < .01, d = 1.14)"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Number Sense — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• Children with LA show a less severe impairment pattern than children with MLD, differing only on symbolic approximate addition — related
• Group differences on symbolic tasks persist after controlling for number identification skill — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• First graders with MLD are slower than typically achieving peers on symbolic but not non-symbolic numerical magnitude comparison — related
• Children succeed at non-symbolic approximate addition above chance with a ratio effect, without relying on non-numerical strategies — related
• People with MLD show a large pooled deficit in mathematics performance versus typically performing peers (g = 1.52) — related
• People with MLD show lower number sense than typically developing peers (g = 0.88), with the largest deficits on mapping tasks — related
• No profile distinguishes more severe, persistent, or specific MLD from less severe MLD on cognitive skills — related