RESUMO
Non-symbolic magnitude abilities are often claimed to support the acquisition of symbolic magnitude abilities, which, in turn, are claimed to support emerging math abilities. However, not all studies find links between non-symbolic and symbolic magnitude abilities, or between them and math ability. To investigate possible reasons for these different findings, recent research has analyzed differences in non-symbolic/symbolic magnitude abilities using latent class modeling and has identified four different magnitude ability profiles residing within the general magnitude ability distribution that were differentially related to cognitive and math abilities. These findings may help explain the different patterns of findings observed in previous research. To further investigate this possibility, we (1) attempted to replicate earlier findings, (2) determine whether magnitude ability profiles remained stable or changed over 1 year; and (3) assessed the degree to which stability/change in profiles were related to cognitive and math abilities. We used latent transition analysis to investigate stability/changes in non-symbolic and symbolic magnitude abilities of 109 5- to 6-year olds twice in 1 year. At Time 1 and 2, non-symbolic and symbolic magnitude abilities, number transcoding and single-digit addition abilities were assessed. Visuospatial working memory (VSWM), naming numbers, non-verbal IQ, basic RT was also assessed at Time 1. Analysis showed stability in one profile and changes in the three others over 1 year. VSWM and naming numbers predicted profile membership at Time 1 and 2, and profile membership predicted math abilities at both time points. The findings confirm the existence of four different non-symbolic-symbolic magnitude ability profiles; we suggest the changes over time in them potentially reflect deficit, delay, and normal math developmental pathways.
RESUMO
Early math abilities are claimed to be linked to magnitude representation ability. Some claim that nonsymbolic magnitude abilities scaffold the acquisition of symbolic (Arabic number) magnitude abilities and influence math ability. Others claim that symbolic magnitude abilities, and ipso facto math abilities, are independent of nonsymbolic abilities and instead depend on the ability to process number symbols (e.g., 2, 7). Currently, the issue of whether symbolic abilities are or are not related to nonsymbolic abilities, and the cognitive factors associated with nonsymbolic-symbolic relationships, remains unresolved. We suggest that different nonsymbolic-symbolic relationships reside within the general magnitude ability distribution and that different cognitive abilities are likely associated with these different relationships. We further suggest that the different nonsymbolic-symbolic relationships and cognitive abilities in combination differentially predict math abilities. To test these claims, we used latent profile analysis to identify nonsymbolic-symbolic judgment patterns of 124, 5- to 7-year-olds. We also assessed four cognitive factors (visuospatial working memory [VSWM], naming numbers, nonverbal IQ, and basic reaction time [RT]) and two math abilities (number transcoding and single-digit addition abilities). Four nonsymbolic-symbolic ability profiles were identified. Naming numbers, VSWM, and basic RT abilities were differentially associated with the different ability profiles and in combination differentially predicted math abilities. Findings show that different patterns of nonsymbolic-symbolic magnitude abilities can be identified and suggest that an adequate account of math development should specify the inter-relationship between cognitive factors and nonsymbolic-symbolic ability patterns.