False approximations of the approximate number system?
Prior research suggests that the acuity of the approximate number system (ANS) predicts future mathematical abilities. Modelling the development of the ANS might therefore allow monitoring of children's mathematical skills and instigate educational intervention if necessary. A major problem however, is that our knowledge of the development of the ANS is acquired using fundamentally different paradigms, namely detection in infants versus discrimination in children and adults. Here, we question whether such a comparison is justified, by testing the adult ANS with both a discrimination and a detection task. We show that adults perform markedly better in the discrimination compared to the detection task. Moreover, performance on discrimination but not detection, correlated with performance on mathematics. With a second similar experiment, in which the detection task was replaced by a same-different task, we show that the results of experiment 1 cannot be attributed to differences in chance level. As only task instruction differed, the discrimination and the detection task most likely reflect differences at the decisional level. Future studies intending to model the development of the ANS should therefore rely on data derived from a single paradigm for different age groups. The same-different task appears a viable candidate, due to its applicability across age groups.
Experimental Psychology, Helmholtz Institute, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Titia.Gebuis@psy.kuleuven.be
Titia
T
Gebuis
Maarten J
MJ
van der Smagt
D000328:Adult; D001076:Aptitude; D002648:Child; D004192:Discrimination, Psychological; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008433:Mathematics; D010775:Photic Stimulation; D013647:Task Performance and Analysis; D055815:Young Adult