Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The role of relational preference in word-problem solving in 6- to 7-year-olds

  • Published:
Educational Studies in Mathematics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Several studies have shown that children do not only erroneously use additive reasoning in proportional word problems, but also erroneously use proportional reasoning in additive word problems. Traditionally, these errors were contributed to a lack of calculation and discrimination skills. Recent research evidence puts forward an additional explanation, namely, children’s relational preference (i.e., in tasks where both, additive and multiplicative reasoning, are appropriate, some children have a preference for additive relations, while others have a preference for multiplicative relations). Children’s relational preference offers a unique explanation for erroneous word-problem solving, after taking into account computation and discrimination skills in 8- to 12-year-olds. However, it is still unclear whether relational preference is also associated with word-problem solving at an earlier age, before the start of formal instruction in word-problem solving. A task measuring children’s relational preference as well as three additive and three proportional word problems was administered to a large group (n = 343) of 6- to 7-year-olds. Results show that relational preference is also associated with word-problem solving behavior at this young age: an additive preference is related with better performance on additive word problems but also with more erroneous additive reasoning in proportional word problems. Similarly, a multiplicative preference is related with better performance on proportional word problems but not yet with more erroneous proportional reasoning in additive word problems. The latter is possibly due to the low number of proportional errors that were made in the additive word problems at this young age. The implications of these findings for further research and educational practice are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available via this link: https://mfr.osf.io/render?url=https%3A%2F%2Fosf.io%2F9kxpz%2Fdownload. The materials used in this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  • Acredolo, C., O’Connor, J., Banks, L., & Horobin, K. (1989). Children’s ability to make probability estimates: Skills revealed through application of Anderson’s Functional Measurement Methodology. Child Development, 60, 933–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahl, V. A., Moore, C. F., & Dixon, J. A. (1992). Development of intuitive and numerical proportional reasoning. Cognitive Development, 7, 81–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/0885-2014(92)90006-D

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • AHOVOKS. (2016). Peilingen wiskunde in het basisonderwijs. AHOVOKS.

  • Boyer, T. W., & Levine, S. C. (2012). Child proportional scaling: Is 1/3 = 2/6 = 3/9 = 4/12? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 111, 516–533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2011.11.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, T. W., Levine, S. C., & Huttenlocher, J. (2008). Development of proportional reasoning: Where young children go wrong. Developmental Psychology, 44(5), 1478–1490. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Degrande, T., Van Hoof, J., Verschaffel, L., & Van Dooren, W. (2018). Open word problems: Taking the additive or the multiplicative road? ZDM-Mathematics Education, 50, 91–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0900-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Degrande, T., Verschaffel, L., & Van Dooren, W. (2017). Spontaneous focusing on quantitative relations: Towards a characterization. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 19, 260–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2017.1365223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Degrande, T., Verschaffel, L., & Van Dooren, W. (2018). Beyond additive and multiplicative reasoning abilities: How preference enters the picture. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 33, 559–576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-017-0352-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Degrande, T., Verschaffel, L., & Van Dooren, W. (2019). To add or to multiply? An investigation of the role of preference in children’s solutions of word problems. Learning and Instruction, 61, 60–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.01.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Degrande, T., Verschaffel, L., & Van Dooren, W. (2020). To add or to multiply in open problems? Unraveling children’s relational preference using a mixed-method approach. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 104(3), 405–430. https://doi-org.kuleuven.ezproxy.kuleuven.be/10.1007/s10649-020-09966-z

  • Edgington, E. S., & Onghena, P. (2007). Randomization tests (4th ed.). Chapman & Hall/CRC

  • Fernández, C., Llinares, S., Van Dooren, W., De Bock, D., & Verschaffel, L. (2012). The development of students’ use of additive and proportional methods along primary and secondary school. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 27, 421–438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-011-0087-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick, C. L., & Hallett, D. (2019). Early understanding of fractions via early proportion and division. In K. M. Robinson, H. P. Osana, & D. Kotsopoulos (Eds.), Mathematical Learning and Cognition in Early Childhood (pp. 249–271). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12895-1

  • Fujimura, N. (2001). Facilitating children’s proportional reasoning: A model of reasoning processes and effects of intervention on strategy change. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 589–603. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.3.589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hickendorff, M., Edelsbrunner, P. A., McMullen, J., Schneider, M., & Trezise, K. (2018). Informative tools for characterizing individual differences in learning: Latent class, latent profile, and latent transition analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 66, 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LINDIF.2017.11.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurst, M. A., & Cordes, S. (2018). Attending to relations: Proportional reasoning in 3- to 6-year-old children. Developmental Psychology, 54(3), 428–439. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kaput, J. J., & West, M. M. (1994). Missing-value proportional reasoning problems: Factors affecting informal reasoning patterns. In G. Harel & J. Confrey (Eds.), The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics (pp. 235–287). SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karplus, R., Pulos, S., & Stage, E. (1983). Proportional reasoning of early adolescents. In R. Lesh & M. Landau (Eds.), Acquisition of mathematical concepts and processes (pp. 45–89). Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesh, R., Post, T., & Behr, M. (1988). Proportional reasoning. In Hiebert & M. Behr (Eds.), Number concepts and operations in the middle grades (pp. 93–118). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • McMullen, J., Hannula-Sormunen, M. M., Laakkonen, E., & Lehtinen, E. (2016). Spontaneous focusing on quantitative relations as a predictor of the development of rational number conceptual knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108, 857–868. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMullen, J., Hannula-Sormunen, M. M., & Lehtinen, E. (2014). Spontaneous focusing on quantitative relations in the development of children’s fractions knowledge. Cognition and Instruction, 32, 198–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2014.887085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMullen, J., Hannula-Sormunen, M. M., & Lehtinen, E. (2013). Young children’s recognition of quantitative relations in mathematically unspecified settings. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 32, 450–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng, R., Heyman, G. D., & Barner, D. (2011). Collaboration promotes proportional reasoning about resource distribution in young children. Developmental Psychology, 47, 1230–1238. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noelting, G. (1980). The development of proportional reasoning and the ratio concept: Part 1. Differentiation of stages. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 11, 217–253. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00304357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (2021). Promoting quantitative reasoning in elementary school. In T. Nunes & P. Bryant (Eds.), Using Mathematics to Understand the World: How Culture Promotes Children’s Mathematics. Routledge.

  • Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (2010). Understanding relations and their graphical representation. In T. Nunes, P. Bryant, & A. Watson (Eds.), Key understanding in mathematics learning. Nuffield Foundation.

  • Pellegrino, J. W., & Glaser, R. (1982). Analyzing aptitudes for learning: Inductive reasoning. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (pp. 269–345). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, L. B., & Singer, J. A. (1993). Protoquantitative origins of ratio reasoning. In T. P. Carpenter, E. Fennema, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Rational numbers: An integration of research (pp. 107–130). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D. L., & Moore, J. L. (1998). On the role of mathematics in explaining the material world: Mental models for proportional reasoning. Cognitive Science, 22, 471–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0364-0213(99)80047-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sophian, C., & Wood, A. (1997). Proportional reasoning in young children: The parts and the whole of it. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 309–317. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.2.309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spinillo, A. G., & Bryant, P. E. (1999). Proportional reasoning in young children: Part-part comparisons about continuous and discrete quantities. Mathematical Cognition, 5, 181–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/135467999387298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spinillo, A. G., & Bryant, P. E. (1991). Children’s proportional judgements: The importance of “half.” Child Development, 62, 427–440. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1991.tb01542.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vamvakoussi, X., Vraka, L., Lioliousi, A., & McMullen, J. (2016). Young children’s spontaneous focusing on simple multiplicative relations. Paper presented at the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education (ICME), Hamburg, Germany.

  • Van Dooren, W., Vamvakoussi, X., Verschaffel, L., Marope, M., Vosniadou, S., Anderson, L., de Ibarrola, M., & Popa, S. (2018). Proportional reasoning. Educational Practices Series, 30. International Academy of Education (IAE).

  • Van Dooren, W., De Bock, D., Vleugels, K., & Verschaffel, L. (2010a). Just answering… or thinking? Contrasting pupils’ solutions and classifications of proportional and non-proportional word problems. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 12, 20–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986060903465806

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Dooren, W., De Bock, D., & Verschaffel, L. (2010b). From addition to multiplication … and back. The development of students’ additive and multiplicative reasoning skills. Cognition and Instruction, 28(3), 360–381. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2010.488306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Dooren, W., De Bock, D., Evers, M., & Verschaffel, L. (2009). Students’ overuse of proportionality on missing-value problems: How numbers may change solutions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40, 187–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dooren, W., De Bock, D., Janssens, D., & Verschaffel, L. (2008). The linear imperative. An inventory and conceptual analysis of students’s additive and multiplicative reasoning skills. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 311–342. https://doi.org/10.2307/30034972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Dooren, W., Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & De Bock, D. (2006). Modelling for life: Developing adaptive expertise in mathematical modelling from an early age. In L. Verschaffel, F. Dochy, M. Boekaerts, & S. Vosniadou (Eds.), Instructional psychology: Past, present and future trends. Sixteen essays in honour of Erik De Corte (pp. 91–112). Elsevier.

  • Van Dooren, W., De Bock, D., Hessels, A., Janssens, D., & Verschaffel, L. (2005). Not everything is proportional: Effects of age and problem type on propensities for overgeneralization. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 57–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2301_3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanluydt, E., Verschaffel, L., & Van Dooren, W. (2022). The role of relational preference in early proportional reasoning. Learning and Individual Differences, 93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102108.

  • Vanluydt, E., Degrande, T., Verschaffel, L., & Van Dooren, W. (2020). Early stages of proportional reasoning: A cross-sectional study with 5-to 9-year olds. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 35(3), 529–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-019-00434-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vergnaud, G. (1994). Multiplicative conceptual field: What and why? In G. Harel & J. Confrey (Eds.), The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics (pp. 41–59). SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vergnaud, G. (1988). Multiplicative structures. In J. Hiebert & M. Behr (Eds.), Number concepts and operations in the middle grades (pp. 141–161). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vergnaud, G. (1983). Multiplicative structures. In R. Lesh & M. Landau (Eds.), Acquisition of mathematics concepts and processes. Academic Press.

  • Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & De Corte, E. (2000). Making sense of word problems. Swets & Zeitlinger.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the Research Fund KU Leuven under Grant C1/16/001.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Instructional Psychology and Technology, University of Leuven, Dekenstraat 2, box 3773, 3000, Leuven, Belgium

    Elien Vanluydt, Lieven Verschaffel & Wim Van Dooren

Authors
  1. Elien Vanluydt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lieven Verschaffel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wim Van Dooren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elien Vanluydt.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Subjects’ parents have given their written informed consent. The study protocol has been approved by the research institute’s committee on human research.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vanluydt, E., Verschaffel, L. & Van Dooren, W. The role of relational preference in word-problem solving in 6- to 7-year-olds. Educ Stud Math 110, 393–411 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10139-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10139-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation