A direct comparison of two measures of ordinal knowledge among 8-year-olds

Xu, Chang; LeFevre, Jo-Anne; Di Lonardo Burr, Sabrina; Maloney, Erin A.; Wylie, Judith; Simms, Victoria; Skwarchuk, Sheri-Lynn; Osana, Helena P.

doi:10.5964/jnc.10201

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrophysiological correlates of symbolic numerical order processing

Brunner,

Schadenbauer,

Schröder

et al. 2024

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Determining if a sequence of numbers is ordered or not is one of the fundamental aspects of numerical processing linked to concurrent and future arithmetic skills. While some studies have explored the neural underpinnings of order processing using functional magnetic resonance imaging, our understanding of electrophysiological correlates is comparatively limited. To address this gap, we used a three-item symbolic numerical order verification task (with Arabic numerals from 1 to 9) to study event-related potentials (ERPs) in 73 adult participants in an exploratory approach. We presented three-item sequences and manipulated their order (ordered vs. unordered) as well as their inter-item numerical distance (one vs. two). Participants had to determine if a presented sequence was ordered or not. They also completed a speeded arithmetic fluency test, which measured their arithmetic skills. Our results revealed a significant mean amplitude difference in the grand average ERP waveform between ordered and unordered sequences in a time window of 500–750 ms at left anterior-frontal, left parietal, and central electrodes. We also identified distance-related amplitude differences for both ordered and unordered sequences. While unordered sequences showed an effect in the time window of 500–750 ms at electrode clusters around anterior-frontal and right-frontal regions, ordered sequences differed in an earlier time window (190–275 ms) in frontal and right parieto-occipital regions. Only the mean amplitude difference between ordered and unordered sequences showed an association with arithmetic fluency at the left anterior-frontal electrode. While the earlier time window for ordered sequences is consistent with a more automated and efficient processing of ordered sequential items, distance-related differences in unordered sequences occur later in time.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrophysiological correlates of symbolic numerical order processing

Brunner,

Schadenbauer,

Schröder

et al. 2024

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, an alternative task does not exist yet, and because numerous studies have used the three-item order verification task, we believe it is still interesting to determine any ERP correlates associated with this task. An active ordering task, where participants need to sort a number of items, is popular in behavioral studies, especially with children (e.g., Xu et al, 2023), and might be employed in future EEG studies. Third, it is worth noting that we defined distance in unordered sequences relative to the first number, whereas distance in ordered sequences applies to both the first and second as well as the second and third numbers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrophysiological correlates of symbolic numerical order processing

Brunner,

Schadenbauer,

Schröder

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Determining if a sequence of numbers is ordered or not is one of the fundamental aspects of numerical processing linked to concurrent and future arithmetic skills. While some studies have explored the neural underpinnings of order processing using functional magnetic resonance imaging, our understanding of electrophysiological correlates is comparatively limited. To address this gap, we used a three-item symbolic numerical order verification task (with Arabic numerals from 1 to 9) to study event-related potentials (ERPs) in 73 adult participants. We presented three-item sequences and manipulated their order (ordered vs. unordered) as well as their inter-item numerical distance (one vs. two). Participants also completed a speeded arithmetic fluency test, which measured their arithmetic skills.Our results revealed a significant mean amplitude difference in the grand average ERP waveform between ordered and unordered sequences in a time window of 500–750 ms at left anterior-frontal, left parietal, and central electrodes. We also identified distance-related amplitude differences for both ordered and unordered sequences. While unordered sequences showed an effect in the time window of 500–750 ms at electrode clusters around anterior-frontal and right-frontal regions, ordered sequences differed in an earlier time window (190–275 ms) in frontal and right parieto-occipital regions. Only the mean amplitude difference between ordered and unordered sequences showed an association with arithmetic fluency at the left anterior-frontal electrode. While the earlier time window for ordered sequences is consistent with a more automated and efficient processing of ordered sequential items, distance-related differences in unordered sequences occur later in time.

show abstract

“…Moreover, if the tendency to reject non-consecutive sequences does result from the task being too cognitively demanding, children who struggle on this task should still be able to indicate non-consecutive sequences as ordered in other contexts. Supporting this, Bugden and Brannon (2021) found that children who consistently rejected non-consecutive sequences during a standard order judgement task were still able to correctly produce ordered non-consecutive sequences during an order production task (for other examples of order production tasks, see Xu et al, 2023 ; Xu & LeFevre, 2021 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Concepts of order: Why is ordinality processed slower and less accurately for non-consecutive sequences?

Devlin,

Moeller,

Xenidou-Dervou

et al. 2024

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both adults and children are slower at judging the ordinality of non-consecutive sequences (e.g., 1-3-5) than consecutive sequences (e.g., 1-2-3). It has been suggested that the processing of non-consecutive sequences is slower because it conflicts with the intuition that only count-list sequences are correctly ordered. An alternative explanation, however, may be that people simply find it difficult to switch between consecutive and non-consecutive concepts of order during order judgement tasks. Therefore, in adult participants, we tested whether presenting consecutive and non-consecutive sequences separately would eliminate this switching demand and thus improve performance. In contrast with this prediction, however, we observed similar patterns of response times independent of whether sequences were presented separately or together (Experiment 1). Furthermore, this pattern of results remained even when we doubled the number of trials and made participants explicitly aware when consecutive and non-consecutive sequences were presented separately (Experiment 2). Overall, these results suggest slower response times for non-consecutive sequences do not result from a cognitive demand of switching between consecutive and non-consecutive concepts of order, at least not in adults.

show abstract

A direct comparison of two measures of ordinal knowledge among 8-year-olds

Cited by 8 publications

References 53 publications

Electrophysiological correlates of symbolic numerical order processing

Electrophysiological correlates of symbolic numerical order processing

Electrophysiological correlates of symbolic numerical order processing

Concepts of order: Why is ordinality processed slower and less accurately for non-consecutive sequences?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About