Group differences on symbolic tasks persist after controlling for number identification skill¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 The group × task interaction on approximate addition remained significant after controlling for number identification accuracy (F(2,59) = 4.46, ηp² = .13). → 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 · i2 · associational · r2

Re-analysis of the approximate addition ANOVA with number identification accuracy as covariate. The "group × task interaction remained" significant, and TA children still outperformed LA and MLD on the symbolic task, indicating poorer symbolic knowledge does not fully account for the deficit.

"When controlling for this variable, the group × task interaction remained (F(2,59) = 4.46, p = .02, ηp² = .13). Post-hoc t-test confirmed that TA children performed significantly more accurately on the symbolic task than children with LA (t(47) = 3.69, p < .01, d = 1.21) and children with MLD (t(43) = 3.47, 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
• Children with MLD and LA are less accurate than TA children on symbolic but not non-symbolic approximate addition — a broader claim this one bears on
• Accuracy on approximate addition decreases as ratio approaches 1, with a stronger ratio effect on the non-symbolic task — related
• First graders with MLD are slower than typically achieving peers on symbolic but not non-symbolic numerical magnitude comparison — related
• People with MLD show lower number sense than typically developing peers (g = 0.88), with the largest deficits on mapping tasks — related