Kindergartners' fluent processing of symbolic numerical magnitude is predicted by their cardinal knowledge and implicit understanding of arithmetic 2years earlier.

Fluency in first graders' processing of the magnitudes associated with Arabic numerals, collections of objects, and mixtures of objects and numerals predicts current and future mathematics achievement. The quantitative competencies that support the development of fluent processing of magnitude, however, are not fully understood. At the beginning and end of preschool (M=3years 9months at first assessment, range=3years 3months to 4years 3months), 112 children (51 boys) completed tasks measuring numeral recognition and comparison, acuity of the approximate number system, and knowledge of counting principles, cardinality, and implicit arithmetic and also completed a magnitude processing task (number sets test) in kindergarten. Use of Bayesian and linear regression techniques revealed that two measures of preschoolers' cardinal knowledge and their competence at implicit arithmetic predicted later fluency of magnitude processing, controlling domain-general factors, preliteracy skills, and parental education. The results help to narrow the search for the early foundation of children's emerging competence with symbolic mathematics and provide direction for early interventions.

Children's mathematical performance: five cognitive tasks across five grades.

Children in elementary school, along with college adults, were tested on a battery of basic mathematical tasks, including digit naming, number comparison, dot enumeration, and simple addition or subtraction. Beyond cataloguing performance to these standard tasks in Grades 1 to 5, we also examined relationships among the tasks, including previously reported results on a number line estimation task. Accuracy and latency improved across grades for all tasks, and classic interaction patterns were found, for example, a speed-up of subitizing and counting, increasingly shallow slopes in number comparison, and progressive speeding of responses especially to larger addition and subtraction problems. Surprisingly, digit naming was faster than subitizing at all ages, arguing against a pre-attentive processing explanation for subitizing. Estimation accuracy and speed were strong predictors of children's addition and subtraction performance. Children who gave exponential responses on the number line estimation task were slower at counting in the dot enumeration task and had longer latencies on addition and subtraction problems. The results provided further support for the importance of estimation as an indicator of children's current and future mathematical expertise.

Cognitive processes of numerical estimation in children.

We tested children in Grades 1 to 5, as well as college students, on a number line estimation task and examined latencies and errors to explore the cognitive processes involved in estimation. The developmental trends in estimation were more consistent with the hypothesized shift from logarithmic to linear representation than with an account based on a proportional judgment application of a power function model; increased linear responding across ages, as predicted by the log-to-lin shift position, yielded reasonable developmental patterns, whereas values derived from the cyclical power model were difficult to reconcile with expected developmental patterns. Neither theoretical position predicted the marked "M-shaped" pattern that was observed, beginning in third graders' errors and fourth graders' latencies. This pattern suggests that estimation comes to rely on a midpoint strategy based on children's growing number knowledge (i.e., knowledge that 50 is half of 100). As found elsewhere, strength of linear responding correlated significantly with children's performance on standardized math tests.

Countries with Higher Levels of Gender Equality Show Larger National Sex Differences in Mathematics Anxiety and Relatively Lower Parental Mathematics Valuation for Girls.

Despite international advancements in gender equality across a variety of societal domains, the underrepresentation of girls and women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) related fields persists. In this study, we explored the possibility that the sex difference in mathematics anxiety contributes to this disparity. More specifically, we tested a number of predictions from the prominent gender stratification model, which is the leading psychological theory of cross-national patterns of sex differences in mathematics anxiety and performance. To this end, we analyzed data from 761,655 15-year old students across 68 nations who participated in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Most importantly and contra predictions, we showed that economically developed and more gender equal countries have a lower overall level of mathematics anxiety, and yet a larger national sex difference in mathematics anxiety relative to less developed countries. Further, although relatively more mothers work in STEM fields in more developed countries, these parents valued, on average, mathematical competence more in their sons than their daughters. The proportion of mothers working in STEM was unrelated to sex differences in mathematics anxiety or performance. We propose that the gender stratification model fails to account for these national patterns and that an alternative model is needed. In the discussion, we suggest how an interaction between socio-cultural values and sex-specific psychological traits can better explain these patterns. We also discuss implications for policies aiming to increase girls' STEM participation.