Computing solutions to algebraic problems using a symbolic versus a schematic strategy

To improve access to algebraic word problems, primary aged students in Singapore are taught to utilise schematic models. Symbolic algebra is not taught until the secondary school years. To examine whether the two methods drew on different cognitive processes and imposed different cognitive demands, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging to examine patterns of brain activation whilst problem solvers were using the two methods. To improve our ability to detect differences attributable to the two methods, rather than participant’s abilities to use the two methods, we used adult problem solvers who had high levels of competency in both methods. In a previous study, we focused on the initial stages of problem solving: translating word problems into either schematic or symbolic representations (Lee et al. in Brain Res 1155:163–171, 2007). In this study, we focused on the later stages of problem solving: in computing numeric solutions from presented schematic or symbolic representations. Participants were asked to solve simple algebraic questions presented in either format. Greater activation in the symbolic method was found in the middle and medial frontal gyri, anterior cingulate, caudate, precuneus, and intraparietal sulcus. Greater activation in the model condition was found largely in the occipital areas. These findings suggest that generating and computing solutions from symbolic representations require greater general cognitive and numeric processing resources than do processes involving model representations. Differences between the two methods appear to be of both a quantitative and qualitative nature.

[1]  S. Dehaene,et al.  THREE PARIETAL CIRCUITS FOR NUMBER PROCESSING , 2003, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[2]  S. Dehaene,et al.  A Magnitude Code Common to Numerosities and Number Symbols in Human Intraparietal Cortex , 2007, Neuron.

[3]  Kiat Hui Khng,et al.  Inhibiting interference from prior knowledge: Arithmetic intrusions in algebra word problem solving , 2009 .

[4]  Michael W. L. Chee,et al.  Neural correlates of symbolic and non-symbolic arithmetic , 2005, Neuropsychologia.

[5]  Fei Xu,et al.  Linking Visual Attention and Number Processing in the Brain: The Role of the Temporo-parietal Junction in Small and Large Symbolic and Nonsymbolic Number Comparison , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[6]  Avishai Henik,et al.  Notation-Dependent and -Independent Representations of Numbers in the Parietal Lobes , 2007, Neuron.

[7]  Mitchell J. Nathan,et al.  The Real Story Behind Story Problems: Effects of Representations on Quantitative Reasoning , 2004 .

[8]  Kerry Lee,et al.  The contributions of working memory and executive functioning to problem representation and solution generation in algebraic word problems , 2009 .

[9]  M. Behrmann,et al.  Parietal cortex and attention , 2004, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[10]  Carolyn Kieran,et al.  Research Issues in the Learning and Teaching of Algebra , 1989 .

[11]  R. Mayer Thinking, Problem Solving, Cognition , 1983 .

[12]  Marvin Minsky,et al.  Semantic Information Processing , 1968 .

[13]  Diane J. Briars,et al.  An integrated model of skill in solving elementary word problems cognition and instruction , 1984 .

[14]  B. Mazoyer,et al.  Neural Correlates of Simple and Complex Mental Calculation , 2001, NeuroImage.

[15]  Christa Neuper,et al.  Fact learning in complex arithmetic and figural‐spatial tasks: The role of the angular gyrus and its relation to mathematical competence , 2009, Human brain mapping.

[16]  Kerry Lee,et al.  Working memory and literacy as predictors of performance on algebraic word problems. , 2004, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[17]  James M. Moser,et al.  Representation of Addition and Subtraction Word Problems. , 1988 .

[18]  H. Pashler STEVENS' HANDBOOK OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY , 2002 .

[19]  Kerry Lee,et al.  Model Method: Obstacle or Bridge to Learning Symbolic Algebra , 2006 .

[20]  F. Donders On the speed of mental processes. , 1969, Acta psychologica.

[21]  G. Orban,et al.  Parietal Representation of Symbolic and Nonsymbolic Magnitude , 2003, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[22]  Kaye Stacey,et al.  Learning the Algebraic Method of Solving Problems , 1999 .

[23]  Philippe Pinel,et al.  Tuning Curves for Approximate Numerosity in the Human Intraparietal Sulcus , 2004, Neuron.

[24]  A. Lewis Training students to represent arithmetic word problems , 1989 .

[25]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Thresholding of Statistical Maps in Functional Neuroimaging Using the False Discovery Rate , 2002, NeuroImage.

[26]  Laure Zago,et al.  Distinguishing visuospatial working memory and complex mental calculation areas within the parietal lobes , 2002, Neuroscience Letters.

[27]  Margarete Delazer,et al.  Imaging early practice effects in arithmetic , 2007, NeuroImage.

[28]  R. Edelman,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging (2) , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  James G. Greeno,et al.  Developmental analysis of understanding language about quantities and of solving problems. , 1988 .

[30]  Wim Fias,et al.  Representation of Number in Animals and Humans: A Neural Model , 2004, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[31]  Zee Ying Lim,et al.  Strategic differences in algebraic problem solving: Neuroanatomical correlates , 2007, Brain Research.

[32]  D. Sleeman,et al.  ALGEBRA STUDENTS' KNOWLEDGE OF EQUIVALENCE OF EQUATIONS , 1991 .

[33]  W Kintsch,et al.  Understanding and solving word arithmetic problems. , 1985, Psychological review.

[34]  V Menon,et al.  Cerebral Cortex doi:10.1093/cercor/bhi055 Developmental Changes in Mental Arithmetic: Evidence for Increased Functional Specialization in the Left Inferior Parietal Cortex , 2005 .

[35]  Robert J. Sternberg,et al.  The Nature of Mathematical Thinking , 1996 .

[36]  Mary Hegarty,et al.  The process of understanding mathematical problems. , 1996 .

[37]  Daniel Ansari,et al.  Does the Parietal Cortex Distinguish between “10,” “Ten,” and Ten Dots? , 2007, Neuron.

[38]  Christa Neuper,et al.  To retrieve or to calculate? Left angular gyrus mediates the retrieval of arithmetic facts during problem solving , 2009, Neuropsychologia.

[39]  Karin Kucian,et al.  Development of Neural Networks for Exact and Approximate Calculation: A fMRI Study , 2008, Developmental neuropsychology.

[40]  Guilherme Wood,et al.  A developmental fMRI study of nonsymbolic numerical and spatial processing , 2008, Cortex.

[41]  John C Gore,et al.  The neural correlates of calculation ability in children: an fMRI study. , 2009, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[42]  Laure Zago,et al.  How verbal and spatial manipulation networks contribute to calculation: An fMRI study , 2008, Neuropsychologia.

[43]  Swee Fong Ng,et al.  The Model Method: Singapore Children's Tool for Representing and Solving Algebraic Word Problems , 2009 .

[44]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Human Symbol Manipulation Within an Integrated Cognitive Architecture , 2005, Cogn. Sci..

[45]  R. Mayer Thinking, problem solving, cognition, 2nd ed. , 1992 .

[46]  L. Shah,et al.  Functional magnetic resonance imaging. , 2010, Seminars in roentgenology.

[47]  A. Kleinschmidt,et al.  A Supramodal Number Representation in Human Intraparietal Cortex , 2003, Neuron.

[48]  Kathryn M. McMillan,et al.  N‐back working memory paradigm: A meta‐analysis of normative functional neuroimaging studies , 2005, Human brain mapping.

[49]  Swee Fong Ng How secondary two express stream students used algebra and the model method to solve problems , 2003 .

[50]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Endogenous Control and Task Representation: An fMRI Study in Algebraic Problem-solving , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[51]  Daniel G. Bobrow,et al.  Natural Language Input for a Computer Problem Solving System , 1964 .