Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34780526›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Testing the role of symbols in preschool numeracy: An experimental computer-based intervention study.

Daniel C Hyde, Yi Mou, Ilaria Berteletti, Elizabeth S Spelke, Stanislas Dehaene, Manuela Piazza

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Daniel C HydeDepartment of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9888-5916
Yi MouDepartment of Psychology, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Social Cognitive Neuroscience and Mental Health, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Ilaria BertelettiEducational Neuroscience Program, Gallaudet University, Washington, D.C, United States of America.
Elizabeth S SpelkeDepartment of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, United States of America.
Stanislas DehaeneCognitive Neuroimaging Unit, CEA DRF/I2BM, INSERM, NeuroSpin Center, Université Paris-Sud, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif/Yvette, France.
Manuela PiazzaCenter for Mind/Brain Sciences, University of Trento, Rovereto, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Numeracy is of critical importance for scholastic success and modern-day living, but the precise mechanisms that drive its development are poorly understood. Here we used novel experimental training methods to begin to investigate the role of symbols in the development of numeracy in preschool-aged children. We assigned pre-school children in the U.S. and Italy (N = 215; Mean age = 49.15 months) to play one of five versions of a computer-based numerical comparison game for two weeks. The different versions of the game were equated on basic features of gameplay and demands but systematically varied in numerical content. Critically, some versions included non-symbolic numerical comparisons only, while others combined non-symbolic numerical comparison with symbolic aids of various types. Before and after training we assessed four components of early numeracy: counting proficiency, non-symbolic numerical comparison, one-to-one correspondence, and arithmetic set transformation. We found that overall children showed improvement in most of these components after completing these short trainings. However, children trained on numerical comparisons with symbolic aids made larger gains on assessments of one-to-one correspondence and arithmetic transformation compared to children whose training involved non-symbolic numerical comparison only. Further exploratory analyses suggested that, although there were no major differences between children trained with verbal symbols (e.g., verbal counting) and non-verbal visuo-spatial symbols (i.e., abacus counting), the gains in one-to-one correspondence may have been driven by abacus training, while the gains in non-verbal arithmetic transformations may have been driven by verbal training. These results provide initial evidence that the introduction of symbols may contribute to the emergence of numeracy by enhancing the capacity for thinking about exact equality and the numerical effects of set transformations. More broadly, this study provides an empirical basis to motivate further focused study of the processes by which children's mastery of symbols influences children's developing mastery of numeracy.

Indexed as

MathematicsData CollectionEducational StatusHumans

Identifiers

PMID34780526
PMCPMC8592431

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.