MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1949739208 · doi:10.1111/desc.12324

Probing the nature of deficits in the ‘Approximate Number System’ in children with persistent Developmental Dyscalculia

2015· article· en· W1949739208 on OpenAlexafffund
Stephanie Bugden, Daniel Ansari

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDyscalculiaPsychologyTypically developingPerceptionDevelopmental psychologyAudiologyWorking memoryCognitive psychologyCognitionDyslexiaNeuroscienceAutism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present study we examined whether children with Developmental Dyscalculia (DD) exhibit a deficit in the so-called 'Approximate Number System' (ANS). To do so, we examined a group of elementary school children who demonstrated persistent low math achievement over 4 years and compared them to typically developing (TD), aged-matched controls. The integrity of the ANS was measured using the Panamath (www.panamath.org) non-symbolic numerical discrimination test. Children with DD demonstrated imprecise ANS acuity indexed by larger Weber fraction (w) compared to TD controls. Given recent findings showing that non-symbolic numerical discrimination is affected by visual parameters, we went further and investigated whether children performed differently on trials on which number of dots and their overall area were either congruent or incongruent with each other. This analysis revealed that differences in w were only found between DD and TD children on the incongruent trials. In addition, visuo-spatial working memory strongly predicts individual differences in ANS acuity (w) during the incongruent trials. Thus the purported ANS deficit in DD can be explained by a difficulty in extracting number from an array of dots when area is anti-correlated with number. These data highlight the role of visuo-spatial working memory during the extraction process, and demonstrate that close attention needs to be paid to perceptual processes invoked by tasks thought to represent measures of the ANS.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations115
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental ScienceSame topicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsFrench-language works237,207