Are number gestures easier than number words for preschoolers?

A Finger-Based Numerical Training Failed to Improve Arithmetic Skills in Kindergarten Children Beyond Effects of an Active Non-numerical Control Training

It is widely accepted that finger and number representations are associated: many correlations (including longitudinal ones) between finger gnosis/counting and numerical/arithmetical abilities have been reported. However, such correlations do not necessarily imply causal influence of early finger-number training; even in longitudinal designs, mediating variables may be underlying such correlations. Therefore, we investigated whether there may be a causal relation by means of an extensive experimental intervention in which the impact of finger-number training on initial arithmetic skills was tested in kindergarteners to see whether they benefit from the intervention even before they start formal schooling. The experimental group received 50 training sessions altogether for 10 weeks on a daily basis. A control group received phonology training of a similar duration and intensity. All children improved in the arithmetic tasks. To our surprise and contrary to most accounts in the literature, the improvement shown by the experimental training group was not superior to that of the active control group. We discuss conceptual and methodological reasons why the finger-number training employed in this study did not increase the initial arithmetic skills beyond the unspecific effects of the control intervention.

Number gestures predict learning of number words

When asked to explain their solutions to a problem, children often gesture and, at times, these gestures convey information that is different from the information conveyed in speech. Children who produce these gesture-speech "mismatches" on a particular task have been found to profit from instruction on that task. We have recently found that some children produce gesture-speech mismatches when identifying numbers at the cusp of their knowledge, for example, a child incorrectly labels a set of two objects with the word "three" and simultaneously holds up two fingers. These mismatches differ from previously studied mismatches (where the information conveyed in gesture has the potential to be integrated with the information conveyed in speech) in that the gestured response contradicts the spoken response. Here, we ask whether these contradictory number mismatches predict which learners will profit from number-word instruction. We used the Give-a-Number task to measure number knowledge in 47 children (Mage  = 4.1 years, SD = 0.58), and used the What's on this Card task to assess whether children produced gesture-speech mismatches above their knower level. Children who were early in their number learning trajectories ("one-knowers" and "two-knowers") were then randomly assigned, within knower level, to one of two training conditions: a Counting condition in which children practiced counting objects; or an Enriched Number Talk condition containing counting, labeling set sizes, spatial alignment of neighboring sets, and comparison of these sets. Controlling for counting ability, we found that children were more likely to learn the meaning of new number words in the Enriched Number Talk condition than in the Counting condition, but only if they had produced gesture-speech mismatches at pretest. The findings suggest that numerical gesture-speech mismatches are a reliable signal that a child is ready to profit from rich number instruction and provide evidence, for the first time, that cardinal number gestures have a role to play in number-learning.

Response patterns of young children from two contrasting SES contexts to different numerical tasks with numbers 1-5

This study contributes to a multifaceted picture of young children's emergent number knowledge by focusing on the variety of ways in which children express and use quantitative information. The authors' aims are to (a) explore the extent to which quantifying collections 1-5 and using that information pose different levels of difficulty to children from 33 to 47 months old, (b) identify intra- and intertask response patterns, and (c) analyze the influence of socioeconomic status and age on these response patterns. Sixty-six children from two contrasting socioeconomic status groups (very low and middle) were asked to solve tasks with 1-5 elements in the context of a game. Using quantitative information turned out to be more complex than quantification. Intra- and intertask response patterns showed that children gradually come to understand the first five numerical values according to the numerical sequence in a much less strict way than that proposed by the cardinal-knowers model that posits that children progress in an orderly way in their number knowledge. Children in different ages and socioeconomic status groups were found to be more similar to each other when the whole arc of responses provided was considered than when solely correct performance was measured.

How many fingers am I holding up? The answer depends on children's language background

Monolingual English-speaking preschool children tend to process number gestures as unanalyzed wholes rather than use the one-to-one (finger-to-quantity) correspondence. By school age, however, children can use the one-to-one correspondence. The purpose of the present studies was to test whether children learn one-to-one correspondence through exposure to a variety of finger configurations to convey a single quantity. In Study 1, we compared children with exposure to multiple one-to-one configurations, that is, French-English and German-English bilingual children, to English monolingual children who see consistent representations. As predicted, the bilingual children performed better in interpreting unconventional number gestures. In Study 2, we compared Chinese-English bilingual children who knew arbitrary one-handed Chinese numbers gestures for quantities 6-10 to Chinese-English bilingual children who did not know these gestures, as well as to monolingual English speakers. Chinese-English bilinguals who knew the arbitrary gestures were more likely to interpret unconventional gestures arbitrarily (i.e., influenced by the written and/or Chinese gesture forms). These children did not differ from English monolinguals in the interpretation of unconventional gestures. These results are consistent with the argument that children can become sensitive to the one-to-one correspondence in number gestures with exposure to multiple configurations for the same quantity.

"I use it when I see it": The role of development and experience in Deaf and hearing children's understanding of iconic gesture

Iconicity is prevalent in gesture and in sign languages, yet the degree to which children recognize and leverage iconicity for early language learning is unclear. In Experiment 1 of the current study, we presented sign-naïve 3-, 4- and 5-year-olds (n=87) with iconic shape gestures and no additional scaffolding to ask whether children can spontaneously map iconic gestures to their referents. Four- and five-year-olds, but not three-year-olds, recognized the referents of iconic shape gestures above chance. Experiment 2 asked whether preschoolers (n=93) show an advantage in fast-mapping iconic gestures compared to arbitrary ones. We found that iconicity played a significant role in supporting 4- and 5-year-olds' ability to learn new gestures presented in an explicit pedagogical context, and a lesser role in 3-year-olds' learning. Using similar tasks in Experiment 3, we found that Deaf preschoolers (n=41) exposed to American Sign Language showed a similar pattern of recognition and learning but starting at an earlier age, suggesting that learning a language with rich iconicity may lead to earlier use of iconicity. These results suggest that sensitivity to iconicity is shaped by experience, and while not fundamental to the earliest stages of language development, is a useful tool once children unlock these form-meaning relationships.

Gesture as a window onto children's number knowledge

Before learning the cardinal principle (knowing that the last word reached when counting a set represents the size of the whole set), children do not use number words accurately to label most set sizes. However, it remains unclear whether this difficulty reflects a general inability to conceptualize and communicate about number, or a specific problem with number words. We hypothesized that children's gestures might reflect knowledge of number concepts that they cannot yet express in speech, particularly for numbers they do not use accurately in speech (numbers above their knower-level). Number gestures are iconic in the sense that they are item-based (i.e., each finger maps onto one item in a set) and therefore may be easier to map onto sets of objects than number words, whose forms do not map transparently onto the number of items in a set and, in this sense, are arbitrary. In addition, learners in transition with respect to a concept often produce gestures that convey different information than the accompanying speech. We examined the number words and gestures 3- to 5-year-olds used to label small set sizes exactly (1-4) and larger set sizes approximately (5-10). Children who had not yet learned the cardinal principle were more than twice as accurate when labeling sets of 2 and 3 items with gestures than with words, particularly if the values were above their knower-level. They were also better at approximating set sizes 5-10 with gestures than with words. Further, gesture was more accurate when it differed from the accompanying speech (i.e., a gesture-speech mismatch). These results show that children convey numerical information in gesture that they cannot yet convey in speech, and raise the possibility that number gestures play a functional role in children's development of number concepts.

Children's mappings between number words and the approximate number system

Humans can represent number either exactly--using their knowledge of exact numbers as supported by language, or approximately--using their approximate number system (ANS). Adults can map between these two systems--they can both translate from an approximate sense of the number of items in a brief visual display to a discrete number word estimate (i.e., ANS-to-Word), and can generate an approximation, for example by rapidly tapping, when provided with an exact verbal number (i.e., Word-to-ANS). Here we ask how these mappings are initially formed and whether one mapping direction may become functional before the other during development. In two experiments, we gave 2-5 year old children both an ANS-to-Word task, where they had to give a verbal number response to an approximate presentation (i.e., after seeing rapidly flashed dots, or watching rapid hand taps), and a Word-to-ANS task, where they had to generate an approximate response to a verbal number request (i.e., rapidly tapping after hearing a number word). Replicating previous results, children did not successfully generate numerically appropriate verbal responses in the ANS-to-Word task until after 4 years of age--well after they had acquired the Cardinality Principle of verbal counting. In contrast, children successfully generated numerically appropriate tapping sequences in the Word-to-ANS task before 4 years of age--well before many understood the Cardinality Principle. We further found that the accuracy of the mapping between the ANS and number words, as captured by error rates, continues to develop after this initial formation of the interface. These results suggest that the mapping between the ANS and verbal number representations is not functionally bidirectional in early development, and that the mapping direction from number representations to the ANS is established before the reverse.

Nature and culture of finger counting: diversity and representational effects of an embodied cognitive tool

Studies like the one conducted by Domahs et al. (2010, in Cognition) corroborate that finger counting habits affect how numbers are processed, and legitimize the assumption that this effect is culturally modulated. The degree of cultural diversity in finger counting, however, has been grossly underestimated in the field at large, which, in turn, has restricted research questions and designs. In this paper, we demonstrate that fingers as a tool for counting are not only naturally available, but are also-and crucially so-culturally encoded. To substantiate this, we outline the variability in finger counting and illustrate each of its types with instances from the literature. We argue that the different types of finger counting all constitute distinct representational systems, and we use their properties-dimensionality, dimensional representation, base and sub-base values, extendibility and extent, sign count, and regularity-to devise a typology of such systems. This allows us to explore representational effects, that is, the cognitive implications these properties may have, for instance, for the efficiency of information encoding and representation, ease of learning and mastering the system, or memory retrieval and cognitive load. We then highlight the ambivalent consequences arising from structural inconsistencies between finger counting and other modes of number representation like verbal or notational systems, and we discuss how this informs questions on the evolution and development of counting systems. Based on these analyses, we suggest some directions for future research in the field of embodied cognition that would profit substantially from taking into account the cultural diversity in finger counting.