ArticleScientific reports2018
Non-adaptive strategy selection in adults with high mathematical anxiety.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Alpha and theta oscillations in mental addition for high and low performers.Cognitive processing · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Participants with mathematical anxiety (MA) tend to show particular difficulty in mathematical operations with high working memory (WM) demands compared to operations with lower WM demands. Accordingly, we examined strategy selection to test the cognitive mechanism underlying the observed weakness of high MA participants in mathematical operations with high WM demands. We compared two groups of college students with high or low MA, in the solution of simple non-carry addition problems (e.g., 54 + 63) and complex carryover addition problems (e.g., 59 + 63). The results indicated that high MA participants showed particular difficulty in the harder carry condition. Testing the strategy selection mechanism among high MA participants, we found in the carry condition 1) they used the common strategy less often compared to low MA participants and 2) employed unusual strategies more often compared to low MA participants. Therefore, high MA participants were less efficient in their strategy selection, which may be due to weaker spatial representations, numerical difficulties, or less experience solving complex problems. These primitive representations are not adaptive, and can negatively impact performance in math tasks with high WM demands.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.