A dissociation between small and large numbers in young children's ability to "solve for x" in non-symbolic math problems

Development of precision of non-symbolic arithmetic operations in 4-6-year-old children

Children can represent the approximate quantity of sets of items using the Approximate Number System (ANS), and can perform arithmetic-like operations over ANS representations. Previous work has shown that the representational precision of the ANS develops substantially during childhood. However, less is known about the development of the operational precision of the ANS. We examined developmental change in the precision of the solutions to two non-symbolic arithmetic operations in 4-6-year-old U.S. children. We asked children to represent the quantity of an occluded set (Baseline condition), to compute the sum of two sequentially occluded arrays (Addition condition), or to infer the quantity of an addend after observing an initial array and then the array incremented by the unknown addend (Unknown-addend condition). We measured the precision of the solutions of these operations by asking children to compare their solutions to visible arrays, manipulating the ratio between the true quantity of the solution and the comparison array. We found that the precision of ANS representations that were not the result of operations (in the Baseline condition) was higher than the precision of solutions to ANS operations (in the Addition and Unknown-addend conditions). Further, we found that precision in the Baseline and Addition conditions improved significantly between 4 and 6 years, while precision in the Unknown-Addend condition did not. Our results suggest that ANS operations may inject "noise" into the representations they operate over, and that the development of the precision of different operations may follow different trajectories in childhood.

Is Nonsymbolic Arithmetic Truly "Arithmetic"? Examining the Computational Capacity of the Approximate Number System in Young Children

Young children with limited knowledge of formal mathematics can intuitively perform basic arithmetic-like operations over nonsymbolic, approximate representations of quantity. However, the algorithmic rules that guide such nonsymbolic operations are not entirely clear. We asked whether nonsymbolic arithmetic operations have a function-like structure, like symbolic arithmetic. Children (n = 74 4- to -8-year-olds in Experiment 1; n = 52 7- to 8-year-olds in Experiment 2) first solved two nonsymbolic arithmetic problems. We then showed children two unequal sets of objects, and asked children which of the two derived solutions should be added to the smaller of the two sets to make them "about the same." We hypothesized that, if nonsymbolic arithmetic follows similar function rules to symbolic arithmetic, then children should be able to use the solutions of nonsymbolic computations as inputs into another nonsymbolic problem. Contrary to this hypothesis, we found that children were unable to reliably do so, suggesting that these solutions may not operate as independent representations that can be used inputs into other nonsymbolic computations. These results suggest that nonsymbolic and symbolic arithmetic computations are algorithmically distinct, which may limit the extent to which children can leverage nonsymbolic arithmetic intuitions to acquire formal mathematics knowledge.

Young Children Intuitively Divide Before They Recognize the Division Symbol

Children bring intuitive arithmetic knowledge to the classroom before formal instruction in mathematics begins. For example, children can use their number sense to add, subtract, compare ratios, and even perform scaling operations that increase or decrease a set of dots by a factor of 2 or 4. However, it is currently unknown whether children can engage in a true division operation before formal mathematical instruction. Here we examined the ability of 6- to 9-year-old children and college students to perform symbolic and non-symbolic approximate division. Subjects were presented with non-symbolic (dot array) or symbolic (Arabic numeral) dividends ranging from 32 to 185, and non-symbolic divisors ranging from 2 to 8. Subjects compared their imagined quotient to a visible target quantity. Both children (Experiment 1 N = 89, Experiment 2 N = 42) and adults (Experiment 3 N = 87) were successful at the approximate division tasks in both dots and numeral formats. This was true even among the subset of children that could not recognize the division symbol or solve simple division equations, suggesting intuitive division ability precedes formal division instruction. For both children and adults, the ability to divide non-symbolically mediated the relation between Approximate Number System (ANS) acuity and symbolic math performance, suggesting that the ability to calculate non-symbolically may be a mechanism of the relation between ANS acuity and symbolic math. Our findings highlight the intuitive arithmetic abilities children possess before formal math instruction.

Children's understanding of economic demand: A dissociation between inference and choice

Adults infer that resources that become scarce over time are in higher demand, and use this "demand inference" to guide their own economic decisions. However, it is unclear when children begin to understand and use economic demand. In six experiments, we investigated the development of demand inference and demand-based economic decisions in 4- to 10-year-old children and adults in the United States. In Experiments 1-5, we showed children two boxes with the same number of compartments but containing different numbers of face-down stickers and varied the information provided about how those differences arose (e.g. that other children had taken the stickers). In separate experiments, we asked children to buy or trade to get a sticker for themselves or to predict what other children would do. We also asked them which set of stickers they thought the other children had preferred to assess their ability to make a demand inference separately from their own choice. Across experiments, children were able to make a demand inference about children's past preferences by 6 years of age. However, children did not use this demand information when making choices for themselves or when predicting what another child would select in the future. In Experiment 6, we adapted the task for adults and found that adult participants inferred that the set containing fewer resources was in higher demand, and selected the higher demand resource for themselves at rates significantly above chance. The overall pattern of results suggests a dissociation between economic inference and economic decisions during early-to-middle childhood. We discuss implications for our understanding of the development of economic reasoning.

First and Second Graders Successfully Reason About Ratios With Both Dot Arrays and Arabic Numerals

Children struggle with exact, symbolic ratio reasoning, but prior research demonstrates children show surprising intuition when making approximate, nonsymbolic ratio judgments. In the current experiment, eighty-five 6- to 8-year-old children made approximate ratio judgments with dot arrays and numerals. Children were adept at approximate ratio reasoning in both formats and improved with age. Children who engaged in the nonsymbolic task first performed better on the symbolic task compared to children tested in the reverse order, suggesting that nonsymbolic ratio reasoning may function as a scaffold for symbolic ratio reasoning. Nonsymbolic ratio reasoning mediated the relation between children's numerosity comparison performance and symbolic mathematics performance in the domain of probabilities, but numerosity comparison performance explained significant unique variance in general numeration skills.