ArticlePloS one2021
Common and distinct predictors of non-symbolic and symbolic ordinal number processing across the early primary school years.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Concepts of order: Why is ordinality processed slower and less accurately for non-consecutive sequences?Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2024Article
- Understanding the complexities of mathematical cognition: A multi-level framework.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
What are the cognitive mechanisms supporting non-symbolic and symbolic order processing? Preliminary evidence suggests that non-symbolic and symbolic order processing are partly distinct constructs. The precise mechanisms supporting these skills, however, are still unclear. Moreover, predictive patterns may undergo dynamic developmental changes during the first years of formal schooling. This study investigates the contribution of theoretically relevant constructs (non-symbolic and symbolic magnitude comparison, counting and storage and manipulation components of verbal and visuo-spatial working memory) to performance and developmental change in non-symbolic and symbolic numerical order processing. We followed 157 children longitudinally from Grade 1 to 3. In the order judgement tasks, children decided whether or not triplets of dots or digits were arranged in numerically ascending order. Non-symbolic magnitude comparison and visuo-spatial manipulation were significant predictors of initial performance in both non-symbolic and symbolic ordering. In line with our expectations, counting skills contributed additional variance to the prediction of symbolic, but not of non-symbolic ordering. Developmental change in ordering performance from Grade 1 to 2 was predicted by symbolic comparison skills and visuo-spatial manipulation. None of the predictors explained variance in developmental change from Grade 2 to 3. Taken together, the present results provide robust evidence for a general involvement of pair-wise magnitude comparison and visuo-spatial manipulation in numerical ordering, irrespective of the number format. Importantly, counting-based mechanisms appear to be a unique predictor of symbolic ordering. We thus conclude that there is only a partial overlap of the cognitive mechanisms underlying non-symbolic and symbolic order processing.
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.