The Foundations of Numeracy: Subitizing, Finger Gnosia, and Fine Motor Ability
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
Butterworth (1999; 2005) proposed that several component abilities support our numerical representations and processes: an innate capacity to represent small numerosities (indexed by subitizing), fine motor ability (indexed here by finger tapping), and the ability to mentally represent one's fingers (indexed by finger gnosia).In the current paper, we evaluated the predictive power of these component abilities in the development of numeration and calculation skills in Grade 1 children (N = 146).Each component ability was found to be a significant unique predictor of number system knowledge, which in turn was related to calculation skill.Finger gnosia was related to calculation skill indirectly through number system knowledge.In contrast, subitizing predicted calculation skill both directly and indirectly through number system knowledge.Our results support Butterworth's view of the foundations of numeracy and have implications for the early identification of children at risk of math difficulties.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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