Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Differences in Symbolic and Non-symbolic Measures of Approximate Number Sense

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Quantitative Psychology (IMPS 2020)

Part of the book series: Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics ((PROMS,volume 353))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The Approximate Number Sense (ANS) is a psychophysical construct thought to underlie quantity estimation, number processing, and the acquisition of number and math concepts during childhood. ANS acuity can be measured through speeded judgments of relative magnitude of symbolic (numerals) or non-symbolic (multiple objects) methods. However, the relationship between symbolic and non-symbolic methods of ANS, and their relationship with other measures of numerical ability, are relatively unclear. We analyzed the two methods on a sample of 22,187 job applicants through the pymetrics talent matching platform. We find that symbolic and non-symbolic measures of ANS are moderately correlated (r = 0.32). The symbolic measure was significantly more correlated with a simple numerical reasoning measure. Both were equally predictive of spatial reasoning, and equally less predictive of working memory performance. This supports the two methods as distinct measures of ANS acuity that relate to domain-specific mathematical cognition.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Pymetrics operates on voluntary data only, and as such demographic information is limited by applicant disclosure.

References

  • Bonny, J. W., & Lourenco, S. F. (2013). The approximate number system and its relation to early math achievement: Evidence from the preschool years. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 114(3), 375–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. B., et al. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dehaene, S. (2007). Symbols and quantities in parietal cortex: Elements of a mathematical theory of number representation and manipulation. In P. Haggard & Y. Rossetti (Eds.), Attention and performance XXII sensorimotor foundations of higher cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dehaene, S. (2011). The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dehaene, S., & Cohen, L. (1997). Cerebral pathways for calculation: Double dissociation between rote verbal and quantitative knowledge of arithmetic. Cortex, 33(2), 219–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dehaene, S., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., & Cohen, L. (1998). Abstract representations of numbers in the animal and human brain. Trends in Neurosciences, 21(8), 355–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fazio, L. K., Bailey, D. H., Thompson, C. A., & Siegler, R. S. (2014). Relations of different types of numerical magnitude representations to each other and to mathematics achievement. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 123, 53–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fazio, L. K., DeWolf, M., & Siegler, R. S. (2016). Strategy use and strategy choice in fraction magnitude comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(1), 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friso-Van den Bos, I., Van der Ven, S. H., Kroesbergen, E. H., & Van Luit, J. E. (2013). Working memory and mathematics in primary school children: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 10, 29–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halberda, J., & Feigenson, L. (2008). Developmental change in the acuity of the“ number sense”: The approximate number system in 3-, 4-, 5-, and 6-year-olds and adults. Developmental Psychology, 44(5), 1457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halberda, J., Mazzocco, M. M., & Feigenson, L. (2008). Individual differences in non-verbal number acuity correlate with maths achievement. Nature, 455(7213), 665–668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inglis, M., Attridge, N., Batchelor, S., & Gilmore, C. (2011). Non-verbal number acuity correlates with symbolic mathematics achievement: But only in children. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(6), 1222–1229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirchner, W. K. (1958). Age differences in short-term retention of rapidly changing information. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55(4), 352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipton, J. S., & Spelke, E. S. (2003). Origins of number sense: Large-number discrimination in human infants. Psychological Science, 14(5), 396–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., Larkin, J. H., & Kadane, J. B. (1984). A cognitive analysis of mathematical problem-solving ability. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence (Vol. 2, pp. 231–273). Hoillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazzocco, M. M., Feigenson, L., & Halberda, J. (2011). Preschoolers’ precision of the approximate number system predicts later school mathematics performance. PLoS One, 6(9), e23749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, J., & Brannon, E. M. (2013). Training the approximate number system improves math proficiency. Psychological Science, 24(10), 2013–2019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pica, P., Lemer, C., Izard, V., & Dehaene, S. (2004). Exact and approximate arithmetic in an amazonian indigene group. Science, 306(5695), 499–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, G. R., Palmer, D., Battista, C., & Ansari, D. (2012). Nonsymbolic numerical magnitude comparison: Reliability and validity of different task variants and outcome measures, and their relationship to arithmetic achievement in adults. Acta Psychologica, 140(1), 50–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliff, R., & Smith, P. L. (2008). A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time. Psychological Review, 111, 333–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sasanguie, D., Göobel, S. M., Moll, K., Smets, K., & Reynvoet, B. (2013). Approximate number sense, symbolic number processing, or number–space mappings: What underlies mathematics achievement? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 114(3), 418–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87(2), 245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thurstone, L. L. (1938). Primary mental abilities (Vol. 119). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tosto, M. G., Hanscombe, K. B., Haworth, C. M., Davis, O. S., Petrill, S. A., Dale, P. S., Malykh, S., Plomin, R., & Kovas, Y. (2014). Why do spatial abilities predict mathematical performance? Developmental Science, 17(3), 462–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, F., & Spelke, E. S. (2000). Large number discrimination in 6-month-old infants. Cognition, 74(1), B1–B11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, F., Spelke, E. S., & Goddard, S. (2005). Number sense in human infants. Developmental Science, 8(1):88–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Frida Polli, founder of pymetrics. We would also like to thank Su Mei Lee, Janelle Szary, Eugenia Fernandez and Nicholas DeVeau for their work on the development and testing of Magnitudes, Shapes, and Sequences; and Fedor Garin and Zachary Smith who led front-end design of the tests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. pymetrics, inc., New York, NY, USA

    Lewis Baker & Anne Thissen-Roe

Authors
  1. Lewis Baker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anne Thissen-Roe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lewis Baker .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Statistics, USBE, Umeå University, Umeå, Västerbottens Län, Sweden

    Marie Wiberg

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Dylan Molenaar

  3. Facultad de Matemáticas, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile

    Jorge González

  4. Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA

    Ulf Böckenholt

  5. Department of Educational Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA

    Jee-Seon Kim

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Baker, L., Thissen-Roe, A. (2021). Differences in Symbolic and Non-symbolic Measures of Approximate Number Sense. In: Wiberg, M., Molenaar, D., González, J., Böckenholt, U., Kim, JS. (eds) Quantitative Psychology. IMPS 2020. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics, vol 353. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74772-5_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation