Relations Between Subitizing Skills and Numeracy Development for 7- and 8-year-old Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Subitizing, the rapid identification of quantities from 1 to 3, is thought to support symbolic numeracy development, however, its exact role remains unclear. This thesis investigated how the rapid naming of quantities within the subitizing range (i.e., 1-3) relates to change in symbolic numeracy skills among 7- and 8-year-olds. Students completed tests on RAN quantity and letter, cognitive skills in grade 2, and arithmetic, number line, and number comparison measures in grades 2 and 3. Both RAN tasks involve similar cognitive processes, but RAN-Q may capture math-specific variance through efficient access to small quantities. I hypothesized that RAN-Q would predict changes in math skills beyond RAN-L. Results showed that RAN-Q uniquely predicted change in number comparison, whereas RAN-L predicted reading accuracy. Neither RAN measure significantly predicted arithmetic or number line performance. These findings provide a nuanced view of the relation between children’s numerical skills and quantity knowledge in mathematical development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".