Duverne Sandrine, Lemaire Patrick
Université de Provence and Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.
Can J Exp Psychol. 2005 Dec;59(4):262-78. doi: 10.1037/h0087479.
We tested whether split effects in arithmetic (i.e., better performance on large-split problems, like 3 + 8 = 16, than on small-split problems, like 3 + 8 = 12) reflect decision processing or strategy selection. To achieve this end, we tested performance of younger and older adults, matched on arithmetic skills, on two arithmetic tasks: the addition/number comparison task (e.g., 4 + 8, 13; which item is the larger?) and in the inequality verification task (e.g., 4 + 8 < 13; Yes/No?). In both tasks, split between additions and proposed numbers were manipulated. We also manipulated the difficulty of the additions, which represents an index of arithmetic fact calculation (i.e., hard problems, like 6 + 8 < 15, are solved more slowly than easy problems, like 2 + 4 < 07, suggesting that calculation takes longer). Analyses of latencies revealed three main results: First, split effects were of smaller magnitude in older adults compared to younger adults, whatever the type of arithmetic task; second, split effects were of smaller magnitude on easy problems; and third, calculation processes were well maintained in older adults with high level of arithmetic skills. This set of results improves our understanding of cognitive aging and strategy selection in arithmetic.
我们测试了算术运算中的拆分效应（即，在诸如3 + 8 = 16这样的大拆分问题上的表现优于诸如3 + 8 = 12这样的小拆分问题）是否反映了决策过程或策略选择。为了实现这一目的，我们测试了在算术技能上相匹配的年轻人和老年人在两项算术任务上的表现：加法/数字比较任务（例如，4 + 8，13；哪个数字更大？）和不等式验证任务（例如，4 + 8 < 13；是/否？）。在这两项任务中，加法与所给数字之间的拆分情况均被操控。我们还操控了加法运算的难度，其代表了算术事实计算的一个指标（即，像6 + 8 < 所给数字这样的难题比像2 + 4 < 所给数字这样的简单问题解决得更慢，这表明计算耗时更长）。对反应时的分析揭示了三个主要结果：第一，无论算术任务的类型如何，老年人的拆分效应幅度均小于年轻人；第二，简单问题上的拆分效应幅度较小；第三，算术技能水平高的老年人的计算过程保持良好。这组结果增进了我们对算术运算中的认知老化和策略选择的理解。
