The approximate number system is not predictive for symbolic number processing in kindergarteners

Abstract

The relation between the approximate number system (ANS) and symbolic number processing skills remains unclear. Some theories assume that children acquire the numerical meaning of symbols by mapping them onto the preexisting ANS. Others suggest that in addition to the ANS, children also develop a separate, exact representational system for symbolic number processing. In the current study, we contribute to this debate by investigating whether the nonsymbolic number processing of kindergarteners is predictive for symbolic number processing. Results revealed no association between the accuracy of the kindergarteners on a nonsymbolic number comparison task and their performance on the symbolic comparison task six months later, suggesting that there are two distinct representational systems for the ANS and numerical symbols.

Keywords:

• Number processing development
• Comparison
• Symbols
• Representation
• Approximate number system

The authors thank all children, parents, and schools that took part in this study. This research was supported by the Research Fund KU Leuven.

Notes

¹ Next to the correlations between the accuracy performances, we also calculated the distance and the ratio effects by means of a difference score (i.e., distance 1 – distance 4 for the distance effect in the symbolic task and ratio 1.2 – ratio 2 for the ratio effects in both nonsymbolic tasks) and correlated them with each other. However, none of these correlations were significant (all rs < .23, all ps > .14).

² When considering only the relatively larger trials of the nonsymbolic comparison task at t₁ (i.e., excluding the subitizable quantities), the correlation between the performance on the nonsymbolic comparison task at t₁ and t₂ remained significantly present, r(41) = .45, p < .001.