↓ Skip to main content

Development of numerical processing in children with typical and dyscalculic arithmetic skills—a longitudinal study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
171 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
Development of numerical processing in children with typical and dyscalculic arithmetic skills—a longitudinal study
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00459
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karin Landerl

Abstract

Numerical processing has been demonstrated to be closely associated with arithmetic skills, however, our knowledge on the development of the relevant cognitive mechanisms is limited. The present longitudinal study investigated the developmental trajectories of numerical processing in 42 children with age-adequate arithmetic development and 41 children with dyscalculia over a 2-year period from beginning of Grade 2, when children were 7; 6 years old, to beginning of Grade 4. A battery of numerical processing tasks (dot enumeration, non-symbolic and symbolic comparison of one- and two-digit numbers, physical comparison, number line estimation) was given five times during the study (beginning and middle of each school year). Efficiency of numerical processing was a very good indicator of development in numerical processing while within-task effects remained largely constant and showed low long-term stability before middle of Grade 3. Children with dyscalculia showed less efficient numerical processing reflected in specifically prolonged response times. Importantly, they showed consistently larger slopes for dot enumeration in the subitizing range, an untypically large compatibility effect when processing two-digit numbers, and they were consistently less accurate in placing numbers on a number line. Thus, we were able to identify parameters that can be used in future research to characterize numerical processing in typical and dyscalculic development. These parameters can also be helpful for identification of children who struggle in their numerical development.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 169 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 29 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 16%
Student > Master 28 16%
Researcher 27 16%
Student > Postgraduate 10 6%
Other 22 13%
Unknown 27 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 97 57%
Neuroscience 11 6%
Social Sciences 9 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 3%
Arts and Humanities 4 2%
Other 12 7%
Unknown 33 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. 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 05 January 2024.
All research outputs
#751,302
of 25,307,332 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#1,542
of 34,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,633
of 293,624 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#80
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,307,332 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,180 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 293,624 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 969 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.