These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: (Non-)symbolic magnitude processing in children with mathematical difficulties: A meta-analysis.
    Author: Schwenk C, Sasanguie D, Kuhn JT, Kempe S, Doebler P, Holling H.
    Journal: Res Dev Disabil; 2017 May; 64():152-167. PubMed ID: 28432933.
    Abstract:
    Symbolic and non-symbolic magnitude representations, measured by digit or dot comparison tasks, are assumed to underlie the development of arithmetic skills. The comparison distance effect (CDE) has been suggested as a hallmark of the preciseness of mental magnitude representations. It implies that two magnitudes are harder to discriminate when the numerical distance between them is small, and may therefore differ in children with mathematical difficulties (MD), i.e. low mathematical achievement or dyscalculia. However, empirical findings on the CDE in children with MD are heterogeneous, and only few studies assess both symbolic and non-symbolic skills. This meta-analysis therefore integrates 44 symbolic and 48 non-symbolic response time (RT) outcomes reported in nineteen studies (N=1630 subjects, aged 6-14 years). Independent of age, children with MD show significantly longer mean RTs than typically achieving controls, particularly on symbolic (Hedges' g=0.75; 95% CI [0.51; 0.99]), but to a significantly lower extent also on non-symbolic (g=0.24; 95% CI [0.13; 0.36]) tasks. However, no group differences were found for the CDE. Extending recent work, these meta-analytical findings on children with MD corroborate the diagnostic importance of magnitude comparison speed in symbolic tasks. By contrast, the validity of CDE measures in assessing MD is questioned.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]