↓ Skip to main content

The role of pattern recognition in children's exact enumeration of small numbers

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Developmental Psychology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The role of pattern recognition in children's exact enumeration of small numbers
Published in
British Journal of Developmental Psychology, January 2014
DOI 10.1111/bjdp.12032
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brenda R. J. Jansen, Abe D. Hofman, Marthe Straatemeier, Bianca M. C. W. van Bers, Maartje E. J. Raijmakers, Han L. J. van der Maas

Abstract

Enumeration can be accomplished by subitizing, counting, estimation, and combinations of these processes. We investigated whether the dissociation between subitizing and counting can be observed in 4- to 6-year-olds and studied whether the maximum number of elements that can be subitized changes with age. To detect a dissociation between subitizing and counting, it is tested whether task manipulations have different effects in the subitizing than in the counting range. Task manipulations concerned duration of presentation of elements (limited, unlimited) and configuration of elements (random, line, dice). In Study 1, forty-nine 4- and 5-year-olds were tested with a computerized enumeration task. Study 2 concerned data from 4-, 5-, and 6-year-olds, collected with Math Garden, a computer-adaptive application to practice math. Both task manipulations affected performance in the counting, but not the subitizing range, supporting the conclusion that children use two distinct enumeration processes in the two ranges. In all age groups, the maximum number of elements that could be subitized was three. The strong effect of configuration of elements suggests that subitizing might be based on a general ability of pattern recognition.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 2%
Unknown 63 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 27%
Student > Bachelor 10 16%
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Master 9 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 9 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 31 48%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Neuroscience 5 8%
Mathematics 3 5%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 14 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 January 2014.
All research outputs
#5,307,749
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Developmental Psychology
#217
of 626 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,576
of 326,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Developmental Psychology
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 626 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,490 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.