Search for: All records

The study tested the hypotheses that boys will have an advantage learning the fractions number line and this advantage will be mediated by spatial abilities. Fractions number line and, as a contrast, fractions arithmetic performance was assessed for 342 adolescents, as was their intelligence, working memory, and various spatial abilities. Boys showed smaller placement errors on the fractions number line (d = -0.22) and correctly solved more fractions arithmetic problems (d = 0.23) than girls. Working memory and intelligence predicted performance on both fractions measures, and a measure of visuospatial attention uniquely predicted number line performance and fully mediated the sex difference. Visuospatial working memory uniquely predicted fractions arithmetic performance and fully mediated the sex difference. The results help to clarify the nuanced relations between spatial abilities and formal mathematics learning and the sex differences that often emerge in mathematical domains that have a visuospatial component. 

The goal was to identify the domain-general cognitive abilities and academic attitudes that are common and unique to reading and mathematics learning difficulties that in turn will have implications for intervention development. Across seventh and eighth grade, 315 (155 boys) adolescents (M age = 12.75 years) were administered intelligence, verbal short-term and working memory, and visuospatial memory, attention, and ability measures, along with measures of English and mathematics attitudes and mathematics anxiety. Teachers reported on students’ in-class attentive behavior. A combination of Bayesian and multi-level models revealed that intelligence and in-class attentive behavior were common predictors of reading accuracy, reading fluency, and mathematics achievement. Verbal short-term memory was more critical for reading accuracy and fluency, whereas spatial ability and mathematics self-efficacy were more critical for mathematics achievement. The combination of intelligence and in-class attentive behavior discriminated typically-achieving students from students with comorbid (D = 2.44) or mathematics (D = 1.59) learning difficulties, whereas intelligence, visuospatial attention, and verbal short-term memory discriminated typically-achieving students from students with reading disability (D = 1.08). The combination of in-class attentive behavior, verbal short-term memory, and mathematics self-efficacy discriminated students with mathematics difficulties from their peers with reading difficulties (D = 1.16). Given the consistent importance of in-class attentive behavior, we conducted post hoc follow-up analyses. The results suggested that students with poor in-class attentive behavior were disengaging from academic learning which in turn contributed to their risk of learning difficulties.