Schneider Michael, Beeres Kassandra, Coban Leyla, Merz Simon, Susan Schmidt S, Stricker Johannes, De Smedt Bert
Department of Psychology, University of Trier, Germany.
Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Parenting and Special Education Research Group, KU Leuven, University of Leuven, Belgium.
Dev Sci. 2017 May;20(3). doi: 10.1111/desc.12372. Epub 2016 Jan 14.
Many studies have investigated the association between numerical magnitude processing skills, as assessed by the numerical magnitude comparison task, and broader mathematical competence, e.g. counting, arithmetic, or algebra. Most correlations were positive but varied considerably in their strengths. It remains unclear whether and to what extent the strength of these associations differs systematically between non-symbolic and symbolic magnitude comparison tasks and whether age, magnitude comparison measures or mathematical competence measures are additional moderators. We investigated these questions by means of a meta-analysis. The literature search yielded 45 articles reporting 284 effect sizes found with 17,201 participants. Effect sizes were combined by means of a two-level random-effects regression model. The effect size was significantly higher for the symbolic (r = .302, 95% CI [.243, .361]) than for the non-symbolic (r = .241, 95% CI [.198, .284]) magnitude comparison task and decreased very slightly with age. The correlation was higher for solution rates and Weber fractions than for alternative measures of comparison proficiency. It was higher for mathematical competencies that rely more heavily on the processing of magnitudes (i.e. mental arithmetic and early mathematical abilities) than for others. The results support the view that magnitude processing is reliably associated with mathematical competence over the lifespan in a wide range of tasks, measures and mathematical subdomains. The association is stronger for symbolic than for non-symbolic numerical magnitude processing. So symbolic magnitude processing might be a more eligible candidate to be targeted by diagnostic screening instruments and interventions for school-aged children and for adults.
许多研究调查了通过数字大小比较任务评估的数字大小处理技能与更广泛的数学能力（如计数、算术或代数）之间的关联。大多数相关性为正，但强度差异很大。目前尚不清楚这些关联的强度在非符号和符号大小比较任务之间是否以及在何种程度上存在系统差异，以及年龄、大小比较测量方法或数学能力测量方法是否为额外的调节因素。我们通过荟萃分析对这些问题进行了研究。文献检索得到45篇文章，报告了17201名参与者的284个效应量。效应量通过二级随机效应回归模型进行合并。符号大小比较任务的效应量（r = 0.302，95%可信区间[0.243，0.361]）显著高于非符号大小比较任务（r = 0.241，95%可信区间[0.198，0.284]），并且随年龄略有下降。解决率和韦伯分数的相关性高于比较熟练度的其他测量方法。对于更依赖大小处理的数学能力（即心算和早期数学能力），相关性高于其他能力。结果支持这样一种观点，即在广泛的任务、测量方法和数学子领域中，大小处理在整个生命周期内与数学能力可靠相关。符号数字大小处理的关联比非符号数字大小处理更强。因此，符号大小处理可能是学龄儿童和成人诊断筛查工具及干预措施更合适的目标。
