Chew Cindy S, Forte Jason D, Reeve Robert A
Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Front Psychol. 2019 Mar 5;10:441. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00441. eCollection 2019.
Non-symbolic magnitude abilities are often claimed to support the acquisition of symbolic magnitude abilities, which, in turn, are claimed to support emerging math abilities. However, not all studies find links between non-symbolic and symbolic magnitude abilities, or between them and math ability. To investigate possible reasons for these different findings, recent research has analyzed differences in non-symbolic/symbolic magnitude abilities using latent class modeling and has identified four different magnitude ability profiles residing within the general magnitude ability distribution that were differentially related to cognitive and math abilities. These findings may help explain the different patterns of findings observed in previous research. To further investigate this possibility, we (1) attempted to replicate earlier findings, (2) determine whether magnitude ability profiles remained stable or changed over 1 year; and (3) assessed the degree to which stability/change in profiles were related to cognitive and math abilities. We used latent transition analysis to investigate stability/changes in non-symbolic and symbolic magnitude abilities of 109 5- to 6-year olds twice in 1 year. At Time 1 and 2, non-symbolic and symbolic magnitude abilities, number transcoding and single-digit addition abilities were assessed. Visuospatial working memory (VSWM), naming numbers, non-verbal IQ, basic RT was also assessed at Time 1. Analysis showed stability in one profile and changes in the three others over 1 year. VSWM and naming numbers predicted profile membership at Time 1 and 2, and profile membership predicted math abilities at both time points. The findings confirm the existence of four different non-symbolic-symbolic magnitude ability profiles; we suggest the changes over time in them potentially reflect deficit, delay, and normal math developmental pathways.
非符号数量能力通常被认为有助于获得符号数量能力，而符号数量能力反过来又被认为有助于新兴数学能力的发展。然而，并非所有研究都发现非符号和符号数量能力之间存在联系，或者它们与数学能力之间存在联系。为了探究这些不同研究结果的可能原因，最近的研究使用潜在类别模型分析了非符号/符号数量能力的差异，并在一般数量能力分布中确定了四种不同的数量能力概况，它们与认知和数学能力的关系各不相同。这些发现可能有助于解释先前研究中观察到的不同结果模式。为了进一步探究这种可能性，我们（1）试图重复早期的研究结果，（2）确定数量能力概况在1年内是保持稳定还是发生变化；以及（3）评估概况的稳定性/变化与认知和数学能力相关的程度。我们使用潜在转变分析来研究109名5至6岁儿童在1年内两次非符号和符号数量能力的稳定性/变化情况。在时间1和时间2，评估了非符号和符号数量能力、数字转码和个位数加法能力。在时间1还评估了视觉空间工作记忆（VSWM）、数字命名、非言语智商、基本反应时间。分析表明，一种概况在1年内保持稳定，其他三种概况发生了变化。VSWM和数字命名在时间1和时间2预测了概况归属，而概况归属在两个时间点都预测了数学能力。这些发现证实了四种不同的非符号-符号数量能力概况的存在；我们认为它们随时间的变化可能反映了缺陷、延迟和正常数学发展路径。
