The training-condition effect on symbolic arithmetic speed persists after controlling for training task reaction time and accuracy¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · 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? The critical main effect of Training Condition on speed remained significant after accounting for training task reaction time (F (3, 91) = 8.680, p < .001) and accuracy (F (3, 91) = 4.285, p < .01) as covariates. → Hyde 2014
Evidence¶
Hyde 2014¶
Hyde, D. C., Khanum, S., & Spelke, E. S. (2014). Brief non-symbolic, approximate number practice enhances subsequent exact symbolic arithmetic in children. Cognition, 131(1), 92-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.12.007
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Further analyses in Experiment 1 addressed the alternative account that task difficulty or engagement explained group differences. The article reports the main effect "remained significant even after effects of training task reaction time" and accuracy were covariates, ruling out difficulty/engagement explanations.
"The critical main effect of Training Condition on speed remained significant even after effects of training task reaction time (F (3, 91) = 8.680, p < .001) and accuracy (F (3, 91) = 4.285, p < .01) were accounted for as covariates"
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Processing Speed — outcome: instruction changes it
Related Claims¶
- Brief practice on non-symbolic approximate numerical addition or comparison tasks speeds subsequent exact symbolic arithmetic in first graders compared with non-numerical magnitude tasks — related
- Engaging symbolic number representations does not by itself prime subsequent symbolic arithmetic: second test-set performance declined in both training groups — reports the opposite
- Non-symbolic numerical addition practice improves accuracy on symbolic arithmetic but not sentence completion, showing the practice effect is specific to mathematics — related
- Symbolic number magnitude training, but not non-symbolic training, significantly improves preschoolers' exact arithmetic — related
- Both numerical training conditions improve magnitude processing more than a story-understanding control condition — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
training-effect-persists-after-task-performance-covariates |
title |
The training-condition effect on symbolic arithmetic speed persists after controlling for training task reaction time and accuracy |
description |
The training-condition effect on symbolic arithmetic speed persists after controlling for training task reaction time and accuracy |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2014 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — hyde-2014 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.