27.12.2013 Views

The influence of the place-value structure of the Arabic number ...

The influence of the place-value structure of the Arabic number ...

The influence of the place-value structure of the Arabic number ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

it is conclusive that <strong>the</strong> <strong>number</strong> <strong>of</strong> inversion errors (indexing wrong order in transcoding)<br />

specifically predicted performance for carry problems while <strong>the</strong> less pure category <strong>of</strong><br />

combination errors became a predictor for non-carry problems. Such an interpretation<br />

corroborates our argument that understanding <strong>the</strong> <strong>place</strong>-<strong>value</strong> <strong>structure</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Arabic</strong> <strong>number</strong>s<br />

should be <strong>of</strong> particular relevance in situations requiring <strong>place</strong>-<strong>value</strong> updating and/or<br />

integration.<br />

Taken toge<strong>the</strong>r, <strong>the</strong> results <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> present longitudinal evaluation clearly indicated<br />

early <strong>place</strong>-<strong>value</strong> understanding to be a highly predictive precursor competency <strong>of</strong> later<br />

arithmetic performance in general and in particular for <strong>the</strong> capability to integrate tens and<br />

units into <strong>the</strong> <strong>Arabic</strong> <strong>place</strong>-<strong>value</strong> system as required in basic arithmetic operations such as<br />

addition problems requiring a carry. Yet, at <strong>the</strong> same time intelligence was not considered to<br />

be a reliable predictor <strong>of</strong> task performance in any <strong>of</strong> our analyses. At a first look this might<br />

seem awkward. However, this observation is in line with recent data that also showed no<br />

reliable interrelation between intelligence and basic numerical tasks such as <strong>number</strong><br />

magnitude comparison (De Smedt et al., 2009b; Halberda, Mazzocco, & Feigenson, 2008) as<br />

well as <strong>number</strong> reading (De Smedt et al., 2009b) and transcoding (Zuber et al., 2009). Most<br />

importantly, this finding seems invariant to <strong>the</strong> fact which intelligence scale was used. While<br />

Zuber and colleagues (2009) also used <strong>the</strong> CFT-1 and De Smedt and co-workers (2009b)<br />

employed a comparable matrices test (i.e., Raven’s standard progressive matrices, Raven,<br />

Court, & Raven, 1992), Halberda et al. (2008) measured intelligence by <strong>the</strong> WASI (Wechsler<br />

abbreviated scale <strong>of</strong> intelligence, Wechsler, 1999). Synced with <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong>re were no<br />

peculiarities during <strong>the</strong> testing sessions at any <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> involved schools, <strong>the</strong> current data do not<br />

corroborate <strong>the</strong> notion <strong>of</strong> a direct link between intelligence and basic numerical concepts such<br />

as <strong>place</strong>-<strong>value</strong> understanding, <strong>the</strong>reby replicating previous results (De Smedt et al., 2009b,<br />

Halberda et al., 2008).<br />

158

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!