Symbolic magnitude comparison contributes more unique variance to fourth graders' multiplication fact performance than nonsymbolic magnitude comparison¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr1·q3
Currency · newest study 2016 · checked against its sources 2026-10-18 (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? Symbolic magnitude comparison explained an additional 11.2% of variance over nonsymbolic comparison (significant), while nonsymbolic comparison explained only 3.7% over symbolic (significant), indicating symbolic comparison contributed more. → Schleepen TMJ 2016
Evidence¶
Schleepen TMJ 2016¶
Schleepen TMJ, Van Mier HI, De Smedt B (2016) The Contribution of Numerical Magnitude Comparison and Phonological Processing to Individual Differences in Fourth Graders' Multiplication Fact Ability. PLoS ONE 11(6): e0158335. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158335
q3 · i? · associational · r1
Two additional hierarchical regressions (N = 63) entered the comparison tasks in separate steps. Symbolic added 11.2% (F(1,57) = 12.2, p < .01); nonsymbolic added 3.7% (F(1,57) = 4.0, p = .049), so symbolic comparison contributed more to individual differences.
"This analysis showed that symbolic magnitude comparison explained an additional 11.2% of the variance over and above nonsymbolic magnitude comparison, which was statistically significant, F(1,57) = 12.2, p < .01."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Arithmetic Fact Retrieval — outcome: instruction changes it
- Number Sense — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
Related Claims¶
- Fourth graders' multiplication fact solving speed correlates significantly with both symbolic and nonsymbolic magnitude comparison speed — related
- Numerical magnitude comparison explains significant unique variance in multiplication fact performance over and above phonological processing, intellectual ability, and general reaction time — related
- Phonological short-term memory (nonword repetition) shows a modest unique contribution to multiplication fact performance, while phonological awareness shows no relation — related
- Both numerical magnitude processing tasks correlate positively with arithmetic fact retrieval, more strongly for symbolic — related
- Snippet selection contributes to integration quality over and above reading fluency and reading comprehension — related
- Inhibition does not uniquely predict arithmetic fact retrieval above numerical magnitude processing — related
- Numerical abilities and serial retrieval fluency predict third-grade multiplication fluency, while working memory shows no significant association in the baseline model — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
symbolic-beats-nonsymbolic-multiplication-variance |
title |
Symbolic magnitude comparison contributes more unique variance to fourth graders' multiplication fact performance than nonsymbolic magnitude comparison |
description |
Symbolic magnitude comparison contributes more unique variance to fourth graders' multiplication fact performance than nonsymbolic magnitude comparison |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2016 |
source_checked |
2026-10-18 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — schleepen-tmj-2016 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.