ArticleThe Behavioral and brain sciences2017
How not to develop a sense of number.
Article in The Behavioral and brain sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A left visual advantage for quantity processing in neonates.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The authors rightly point to the theoretical importance of interactions of space and number through the life span, yet propose a theory with several weaknesses. In addition to proclaiming itself unfalsifiable, its stage-like format and emphasis on the role of selective attention are at odds with what is known about the development of spatial-numerical associations in infancy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29342629What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.