How is phonological processing related to individual differences in children’s arithmetic skills?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While there is evidence for an association between the development of reading and arithmetic, the precise locus of this relationship remains to be determined. Findings from cognitive neuroscience research that point to shared neural correlates for phonological processing and arithmetic as well as recent behavioral evidence led to the present hypothesis that there exists a highly specific association between phonological awareness and single-digit arithmetic with relatively small problem sizes. The present study examined this association in 37 typically developing fourth and fifth grade children. Regression analyses revealed that phonological awareness was specifically and uniquely related to arithmetic problems with a small but not large problem size. Further analysis indicated that problems with a high probability of being solved by retrieval, but not those typically associated with procedural problem-solving strategies, are correlated with phonological awareness. The specific association between phonological awareness and arithmetic problems with a small problem size and those for which a retrieval strategy is most common was maintained even after controlling for general reading ability and phonological short-term memory. The present findings indicate that the quality of children's long-term phonological representations mediates individual differences in single-digit arithmetic, suggesting that more distinct long-term phonological representations are related to more efficient arithmetic fact retrieval.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it