↓ Skip to main content

TEMA and Dot Enumeration Profiles Predict Mental Addition Problem Solving Speed Longitudinally

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
54 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
TEMA and Dot Enumeration Profiles Predict Mental Addition Problem Solving Speed Longitudinally
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02263
Pubmed ID
Authors

Clare S. Major, Jacob M. Paul, Robert A. Reeve

Abstract

Different math indices can be used to assess math potential at school entry. We evaluated whether standardized math achievement (TEMA-2 performance), core number abilities (dot enumeration, symbolic magnitude comparison), non-verbal intelligence (NVIQ) and visuo-spatial working memory (VSWM), in combination or separately, predicted mental addition problem solving speed over time. We assessed 267 children's TEMA-2, magnitude comparison, dot enumeration, and VSWM abilities at school entry (5 years) and NVIQ at 8 years. Mental addition problem solving speed was assessed at 6, 8, and 10 years. Longitudinal path analysis supported a model in which dot enumeration performance ability profiles and previous mental addition speed predicted future mental addition speed on all occasions, supporting a componential account of math ability. Standardized math achievement and NVIQ predicted mental addition speed at specific time points, while VSWM and symbolic magnitude comparison did not contribute unique variance to the model. The implications of using standardized math achievement and dot enumeration ability to index math learning potential at school entry are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 17%
Student > Master 8 15%
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 12 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 24 44%
Social Sciences 6 11%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 19 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 December 2017.
All research outputs
#18,822,154
of 23,325,355 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,938
of 31,023 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#330,874
of 442,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#444
of 519 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,325,355 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,023 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 442,637 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 519 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.