ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Beyond Accuracy: Reaction Time and Task Format Effects in Early Mathematical Processing.
Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
This exploratory study explores associations among task format, gender-related variation, response accuracy and reaction time (RT) in early mathematics learning. Since traditional assessments often emphasize correctness, the study combines accuracy and RT measures to capture children's temporal processing patterns during problem solving. Thirty-seven first-grade students in Taiwan (21 girls, 16 boys; M_age = 7.2 years, SD = 0.43) completed two computerized tasks implemented using PsychoPy/Pavlovia involving formula-based symbolic arithmetic and competency-based problems with contextualized text and visual representations. Mixed-effects models were used to analyze RT and accuracy at participant and item levels. Accuracy was higher in the formula-based condition than in the competency-based condition. The Experiment × Gender interaction was not significant, and the final accuracy model showed a significant effect of experiment but no evidence of a significant gender effect. Boys showed numerically higher accuracy than girls in the formula-based condition, but this difference was reduced in the competency-based condition. For correct trials, RTs were longer in the competency-based condition; neither gender nor the Experiment × Gender interaction was significant. In the all-trial RT model, significant Accuracy × Experiment and Accuracy × Gender interactions indicated that RT differences between correct and incorrect trials varied by condition and gender. The fixed task order requires cautious interpretation of these findings.
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.