Extending ideas of numerical order beyond the count-list from kindergarten to first grade.

Ordinal processing plays a fundamental role in both the representation and manipulation of symbolic numbers. As such, it is important to understand how children come to develop a sense of ordinality in the first place. The current study examines the role of the count-list in the development of ordinal knowledge through the investigation of two research questions: (1) Do K-1 children struggle to extend the notion of numerical order beyond the count-list, and if so (2) does this extension develop incrementally or manifest as a qualitative re-organization of how children recognize the ordinality of numerical sequences.

The relation between subitizable symbolic and non-symbolic number processing over the kindergarten school year.

A long-standing debate in the field of numerical cognition concerns the degree to which symbolic and non-symbolic processing are related over the course of development. Of particular interest is the possibility that this link depends on the range of quantities in question. Behavioral and neuroimaging research with adults suggests that symbolic and non-symbolic quantities may be processed more similarly within, relative to outside of, the subitizing range.

Developmental specialization of the left intraparietal sulcus for symbolic ordinal processing.

Symbolic numbers have both cardinal (symbol-quantity) and ordinal (symbol-symbol) referents. Despite behavioural evidence suggesting distinct processing of cardinal and ordinal referents, little consensus has emerged from the neuroimaging literature on whether these processes have shared or distinct neural underpinnings. Moreover, it remains unclear how the neural correlates of cardinal and ordinal processing change with age.

More Similar Than Different: Gender Differences in Children's Basic Numerical Skills Are the Exception Not the Rule.

This study investigates gender differences in basic numerical skills that are predictive of math achievement. Previous research in this area is inconsistent and has relied upon traditional hypothesis testing, which does not allow for assertive conclusions to be made regarding nonsignificant findings. This study is the first to compare male and female performance (N = 1,391; ages 6-13) on many basic numerical tasks using both Bayesian and frequentist analyses.