A Unified Framework for Bounded and Unbounded Numerical Estimation

Representations of numerical value have been assessed by using bounded (e.g., 0–1,000) and unbounded (e.g., 0-?) number-line tasks, with considerable debate regarding whether 1 or both tasks elicit unique cognitive strategies (e.g., addition or subtraction) and require unique cognitive models. To test this, we examined how well a mixed log-linear model accounted for 86 5- to 9-year-olds’ estimates on bounded and unbounded number-line tasks and how well it predicted mathematical performance. Compared with mixtures of 4 alternative models, the mixed log-linear model better predicted 76% of individual children’s estimates on bounded number lines and 100% of children’s estimates on unbounded number lines. Furthermore, the distribution of estimates was fit better by a Bayesian log-linear model than by a Bayesian distributional model that depicted estimates as being anchored to varying number of reference points. Finally, estimates were generally more logarithmic on unbounded than bounded number lines, but logarithmicity scores on both tasks predicted addition and subtraction skills, whereas model parameters of alternative models failed to do so. Results suggest that the logarithmic-to-linear shift theory provides a simple, unified framework for numerical estimation with high descriptive adequacy and yields uniquely accurate predictions for children’s early math proficiency.

[1]  J. Opfer,et al.  Learning without representational change: development of numerical estimation in individuals with Williams syndrome. , 2012, Developmental science.

[2]  Melissa E. Libertus,et al.  Comment on "Log or Linear? Distinct Intuitions of the Number Scale in Western and Amazonian Indigene Cultures" , 2009, Science.

[3]  H. Barth,et al.  Developmental change in numerical estimation. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[4]  Barbara W Sarnecka,et al.  Children's number-line estimation shows development of measurement skills (not number representations). , 2014, Developmental psychology.

[5]  Clarissa A. Thompson,et al.  Costs and benefits of representational change: effects of context on age and sex differences in symbolic magnitude estimation. , 2008, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[6]  Korbinian Moeller,et al.  Unbounding the mental number line—new evidence on children's spatial representation of numbers , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[7]  M. Ashcraft,et al.  Cognitive processes of numerical estimation in children. , 2012, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[8]  Robert S Siegler,et al.  The powers of noise-fitting: reply to Barth and Paladino. , 2011, Developmental science.

[9]  Brian P. Dyre,et al.  Bias in proportion judgments: the cyclical power model. , 2000, Psychological review.

[10]  Jeffrey N Rouder,et al.  Children's cognitive representation of the mathematical number line. , 2014, Developmental science.

[11]  Aki Vehtari,et al.  Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC , 2015, Statistics and Computing.

[12]  D. Burr,et al.  Compressive mapping of number to space reflects dynamic encoding mechanisms, not static logarithmic transform , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  Clarissa A. Thompson,et al.  The trouble with transfer: insights from microgenetic changes in the representation of numerical magnitude. , 2008, Child development.

[14]  R. Siegler,et al.  The Development of Numerical Estimation , 2003, Psychological science.

[15]  Brian Butterworth,et al.  Mapping numerical magnitudes along the right lines: differentiating between scale and bias. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[16]  D. Cohen,et al.  Numerical bias in bounded and unbounded number line tasks , 2011, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[17]  Clarissa A. Thompson,et al.  How 15 hundred is like 15 cherries: effect of progressive alignment on representational changes in numerical cognition. , 2010, Child development.

[18]  Robert S. Siegler,et al.  Representational change and children’s numerical estimation , 2007, Cognitive Psychology.

[19]  D. Geary,et al.  Development of arithmetical competencies in Chinese and American children: influence of age, language, and schooling. , 1996, Child development.

[20]  Elida V. Laski,et al.  Is 27 a big number? Correlational and causal connections among numerical categorization, number line estimation, and numerical magnitude comparison. , 2007, Child development.

[21]  Julie L. Booth,et al.  Development of numerical estimation in young children. , 2004, Child development.

[22]  David C. Burr,et al.  Linear mapping of numbers onto space requires attention , 2012, Cognition.

[23]  Robert S. Siegler,et al.  The Logarithmic-To-Linear Shift: One Learning Sequence, Many Tasks, Many Time Scales , 2009 .

[24]  D. Nowlan,et al.  Costs and benefits. , 1980, Irish medical journal.

[25]  Julie L. Booth,et al.  Developmental and individual differences in pure numerical estimation. , 2006, Developmental psychology.

[26]  R S Siegler Individual differences in strategy choices: good students, not-so-good students, and perfectionists. , 1988, Child development.

[27]  Dominique Peeters,et al.  Children’s use of number line estimation strategies , 2016 .

[28]  David Landy,et al.  Estimating Large Numbers , 2013, Cogn. Sci..

[29]  Clarissa A. Thompson,et al.  Free versus anchored numerical estimation: A unified approach , 2016, Cognition.

[30]  Hilary C Barth,et al.  The development of numerical estimation: evidence against a representational shift. , 2011, Developmental science.