Contemporary Educational Psychology 54 (2018) 112–124

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Contemporary Educational Psychology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cedpsych

Promoting preschoolers' numerical knowledge through spatial analogies: T

Numbers’ spatial alignment influences its learning
⁎
Jairo A. Navarretea, , David M. Gómezb, Pablo Dartnellc
a
Departamento de Ciencias Básicas, Universidad del Bío-Bío, Chillán, Chile
b
Instituto de Ciencias de la Educación, Universidad de O’Higgins, Rancagua, Chile
c
Centro de Modelamiento Matemático (CMM), Centro de Investigación Avanzada en Educación (CIAE) de la Universidad de Chile, Periodista José Carrasco Tapia No 75,
Santiago, Chile

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The development of early numerical representations is a complex cognitive process whereby children acquire
Instructional design numerical competences. To establish whether analogy making plays a role in this process of learning, we devised
Analogy a classroom game based on an analysis of a number-line analogy that leverages children' spatial intuitions for
Number line helping them understand the numbers. To investigate the role of spatial positioning along the number line,
Mathematics education
seventy-seven preschoolers were randomly assigned to control tasks (control condition) or to embodied number
line tasks in two possible spatial locations: watching numbers increasing either from left to right (space-number
alignment condition) or from right to left (space-number misalignment condition). Performing learning activities
for roughly two hours promoted children's proficiency in four tasks of numerical knowledge, but only children
under spatial and numerical alignment increased their proficiency in a task of number line estimation. This
finding shows that the numerical representations generated by children during training were integrated with
spatial information that was implicit in the learning activities, thus revealing that analogical alignments play a
key role in the formation of early numerical representations. Additionally, this study illustrates that inter-
rogating the analogy at the foundation of an instructional activity highlights key instructional decisions that can
have a large impact on learning. Future research along this line might provide a framework for using analogy at
the foundations of instructional design.

1. Introduction this theoretical account, children learn the numbers by solving a

A progressive educational community around the world is calling
for more hands-on, inquiry-based and constructivist activities in class-
rooms. However, the learning sciences community is aware that these
activities by themselves are not enough to ensure learning (Kirschner,
Sweller, & Clark, 2006; Kolodner, 2002) and thus the challenge is to
develop instructional methods that promote learner’s appropriate cog-
nitive processing rather than methods that promote hand-on activity as
ends in themselves (Mayer, 2004; Newcombe et al., 2009). Therefore, a
key goal for learning scientists is to bridge the gap between theoretical
understandings of basic cognitive processes and the design of in-
novative technologies for learning.
Children’s learning of numbers might seem natural and easy at the
surface. However, a closer inspection to the nature and duration of this
process of learning reveals otherwise. Seminal work by Gelman and
Gallistel (1978) posited an ontogenetic theory where children’s learning
of numbers was guided by an innate, nonlinguistic “numeron list”. In
mapping problem: identifying the list in their natural language that
expresses the antecedently available mental count list. However, this
theoretical account was discarded because it predicts a pattern of
learning that is at odds with recently available data for the learning of
numbers. In cultures where counting is salient, children construct an
early representation of the positive integers between ages 2 and 4. In a
first stage, children cannot reliably give one object when asked for it.
Between 24 and 30 months of age, they can reliably give one object but
hand over a random number of objects (greater than one) when any
other numeral is used in the request. This stage last for 6 to 9 months.
Then, they can reliably give one or two objects but hand over a random
number of objects when asked for any other numeral. After a while,
they can reliably give one, two or three objects but hand over a random
number of objects when asked for any other numeral in their count list
(which can even reach to ten). Around age three and a half, english-
speakers, middle-class children infer the numerical meaning of
counting: they can produce sets with the cardinal value of any numeral

⁎
Corresponding author at: Departamento de Ciencias Básicas, Universidad del Bío-Bío, Av. Andrés Bello 720, Chillán 3800708, Chile.
E-mail address: jnavarrete@ubiobio.cl (J.A. Navarrete).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.06.006

Available online 18 June 2018

0361-476X/ © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY/4.0/).
J.A. Navarrete et al.
Fig. 1. The training tasks provide appropriate cues for all the alignments involved in the educational analogy. (a) Describes how a token’s jump serves as a scaffold to
structure the numerical concept of successor. (b) Illustrates how spatial magnitudes are analog to the concept of numerical distances.
in their count list. Carey (2009) has argued that this pattern of learning
is accounted by a bootstrapping process that recruits the core cognition
systems of parallel individuation and natural language quantification
for building a conceptual system able to represent natural numbers (see
also Piantadosi, Tenenbaum, & Goodman, 2012).
This conceptual system for representing numbers continues to de-
velop by integrating another core cognition system that is able to re-
present magnitudes such as the area of a wall, the cardinality of a set or
the duration of a time interval. Once children acquired the numerical
meaning of counting, they begin to map innate representations of
magnitude to numerals in their count list. For numbers between one
and ten, the accuracy of their representations of magnitude changes
between ages 3 and 6: Children’s estimates of numbers location on a
number line initially follow a logarithmic pattern that afterwards be-
comes more linear contingent to development and training (Berteletti,
Lucangeli, Piazza, Dehaene, & Zorzi, 2010). These representations of
numerical magnitude provide children with stronger computational
abilities, for example, adults use this sort of representations to perform
numerical comparisons: the fact that they find harder to identify which
number is larger between 6 and 5 than between 9 and 5 (Dehaene,
1997) shows the Weber-fraction signature of analog magnitudes at
performing these comparisons. But the process by which numerals and
magnitudes are tied together is not yet completely understood. Al-
though it has been suggested that children acquire this mapping
through associative learning, meaning that children integrate numerals
with representations of magnitude by simply observing which cardin-
alities are represented by which numerals, it is highly unlikely that
adults need to experience a pairing of 240 entities with the numeral
“240” to be able to estimate, with a numeral, the cardinal value of a set
of 240 dots (Carey, 2009). Furthermore, in tasks of estimating the
number of dots in a set, adults improve dramatically their performance
when there is a calibration trial (e.g., being told how many dots are in a
sample of 150 dots) meaning that there exists a productive method to
generate the mappings between numerals and magnitudes (Corre &
Carey, 2007; Carey, 2009).
The above highlights a gap in literature regarding the mechanisms
that support the formation of these bonds between numerals and
magnitudes. We draw on research about the formation of early nu-
merical representations to hypothesize that the aforementioned map-
pings are supported by analogy—the human faculty to contrast and
compare two entities by aligning their structure (Gentner, 1983). In a
learning experiment, psychologists R. Siegler and G. Ramani compared
the gains in numerical knowledge between children who played a linear
numerical board and children who played the same numerical game but
printed on a circular board. They found that the linear numerical game
was superior to the circular variant for promoting children’s perfor-
mance in various numerical tasks including making estimations of
number location on a number-line (2009). This superiority was ac-
counted in terms of analogical mappings because there is “a more direct
mapping between the board game and the desired mental representa-
tion” arguably due to the fact that “physical representations that cap-
ture key structural features of desired internal representations and map
onto them in transparent ways are often particularly compelling”
113
Contemporary Educational Psychology 54 (2018) 112–124
(2009, p. 547). They emphasized that
[linear, numerical] board games provide multiple cues to both the
order of numbers and the numbers’ magnitudes. In such games, the
greater the number in a square, the greater (a) the distance that the
child has moved the token, (b) the number of discrete moves the
child has made, (c) the number of number names the child has
spoken, (d) the number of number names the child has heard, and
(e) the amount of time since the game began. The linear relations
between numerical magnitudes and these visuospatial, kinesthetic,
auditory, and temporal cues provide a broadly based, multimodal
foundation for a linear representation of numerical magnitudes
(2009, p. 546).
In this context, an important research question that is still un-
answered is whether in fact it is the spatial elements of Siegler’s and
Ramani’s game that are crucial, or whether any type of experience with
a number line promotes children’s numerical knowledge. Notice that
spatial information might be a preeminent element in the formation of
numerical representations since representations for space and number
are in close relationship up from early ages (Lourenco & Longo, 2010).
Furthermore, a theoretical analysis on the aforementioned linear nu-
merical games suggests that these games provide perfect spatial analogs
to mental representations of numerical magnitudes (Navarrete &
Dartnell, 2017). Navarrete and Dartnell’s analysis suggests that the
impression of numbers on the board game facilitates that the spatial
magnitude growth between a box and the next one can be analogically
aligned to the change between a number in the count list and its suc-
cessor (see Fig. 1a). Similarly, the space separating two boxes can be
aligned to the magnitude representing the distance between two
numbers (see Fig. 1b), and the comparison between the spatial loca-
tions determining the winning competitor (the closer to the finish line)
can be aligned to magnitude comparisons that determine the outcome
of number comparisons (see Appendix A for an adaptation of the ori-
ginal formal analysis).
Hence, playing linear numbered games repeatedly should facilitate
learners to integrate a count list of numerals with representations of
magnitude. In this study we sought to establish whether the analogical
alignment between a spatial configuration within the number line and
the intended numerical representation is able to influence children’s
generation of numerical representations. We aimed to assess whether
numerals in the children’s count list are linked only to representations
of magnitude, or alternatively, if they are linked to further spatial in-
formation contingent to the training activities. If numerals were
mapped only to magnitude representations, children playing a linear
numbered game with a left-to-right orientation (*1_2_…_ 9_10) would
generate the same numerical representations that children playing the
same numbered game in a reversed orientation (10_9_…_2_1*) because
the two versions of the game display the exact same spatial distances
associated to the same numbers. In this case, there would be no dif-
ferences in performance between these groups of children across var-
ious numerical tasks. The other possibility tested here is that numerals
end up linked (in addition to representations of magnitude) to further
spatial information meaning that children who perceive numbers as
J.A. Navarrete et al.
Fig. 2. Design of the materials and its basic arrangement to perform instructional activities on a large group of children. Children on top perceive numbers as
increasing from right-to-left and thus they experience a misalignment between the intended numerical representation and the spatial analog given by our learning
materials; whereas children at the bottom perceive numbers as increasing from left-to-right and thus they experience an alignment between the intended numerical
representation and the spatial analog given by our learning materials.
increasing from left to right (spatial analog aligned with the standard
number line) would encode, for example, “1” as the “leftmost number”
whereas the other children (spatial analog misaligned with the standard
number line) would encode “1” as the “rightmost number”. In this case,
children’s performance in numerical tasks would be contingent on the
task’s displaying of spatial information because these visuospatial cues
would either agree or conflict with the spatial information integrated in
the numerical representations acquired by children during training.
To assess the extent to which numerical representations are linked
to spatial information we designed a set of learning materials that al-
lowed us to manipulate the alignment between the game’s spatial
configuration and children’s intended numerical representation while
working with the two experimental groups at the same time (see ma-
terials section). These materials suited to large groups of children (see
Fig. 2) and thus we developed learning activities adequate to large
groups of children. Next section outlines the theoretical framework
applied for the design of these materials and learning activities. The
controlled school intervention that allowed us to obtain experimental
data is described in the methods section. The results section performs
analysis on the obtained data by using regression analysis, analysis of
variance and information theory. The last part of this work discusses the
role of spatial alignment in the formation of early numerical re-
presentations and the implications of leveraging analysis of analogical
alignments for benefiting the design of instruction.
2. Analogy based design of a large group classroom activity
Literature on analogical research indicates that the relational
structure of space can be leveraged to provide effective scaffolding to
the learner’s incipient numerical knowledge (Dehaene & Brannon,
2011; Núñez & Cooperrider, 2013; Richland, Stigler, & Holyoak, 2012).
It has been shown that explicit cuing of analogical relations and redu-
cing processing demands improves learning (see Richland &
McDonough, 2010): Cognitive load reduces learner’s ability to focus on
structural commonalities during instruction making them less likely to
benefit from the instructional analogy, and for young children, the
distraction from irrelevant surface features are particularly striking
(Richland, Morrison, & Holyoak, 2006). Hence, effective instructional
designs should devise manners to engage learners with (and only with)
114
Contemporary Educational Psychology 54 (2018) 112–124
the information aimed to structure the target knowledge.
Our learning activities were designed to give the teacher in charge
(coordinator) opportunities to perform certain training tasks in front of
children who are observing these tasks in a context of a race between
two teddy competitors (see Fig. 2). These training tasks emphasize
analogical mappings that highlight the structural similarity between the
spatial analog provided by the learning materials and the intended re-
presentations of numerical magnitudes. The analogical mappings are
implemented (a) by printing the ten numbers on the spatial boxes of the
learning materials and (b) by a variety of cues and feedback provided
by the coordinator when performing the training tasks to help children
structure their numerical knowledge (see Fig. 2).
The following design is based on the mapping analysis previously
discussed (Navarrete & Dartnell, 2017) which emphasizes three ana-
logical maps. The first analogical mapping was implemented as token
hops. Fig. 1a illustrates how a token hop is a visuospatial representation
that can be aligned to the concept of the successor of a number. In the
training tasks, the coordinator provides cues by saying for example that
“the token goes from 3 to the next number, which is 4”. Also, the co-
ordinator asks the group of children about “what number follows
three?” and afterwards provides feedback. The second analogical
mapping was aimed to train numerical distances. The estimation of
distances between pairs of tokens was encouraged since it becomes a
visuospatial representation of magnitude representations (see Fig. 1b).
In the training tasks, the coordinator provides cues by saying that “the
token on the 5 is separated 3 boxes from the token on the 8” while
pointing to the tokens accordingly (see Fig. 2). Also, the coordinator
asks children about “what is the distance between the token standing at
5 and the token standing at 8?” and afterwards provides feedback. The
third analogical mapping was aimed to highlight number comparisons.
The identification of the token that goes ahead in the race was en-
couraged since it is a visuospatial representation of a comparison be-
tween two magnitudes. In the training tasks, the coordinator provides
cues by drawing learners' attention to the two competing tokens and by
saying that “this token is at 5 and this other one is at 8, therefore this
one is going ahead” while pointing at them accordingly (see Fig. 2).
Also, the coordinator asks children about “which character is winning
now?” and afterwards provides feedback.
In this manner, the designed activities facilitates learners strive to
J.A. Navarrete et al.
make sense of what they observe by (1) selecting relevant incoming
information, (2) organizing it into a coherent structure, and (3) in-
tegrating it with other organized knowledge. These three features have
been coined as meaningful learning (Mayer, 2003) and are embodied in
the design of our training tasks by means of the analogical mappings
that create links between spatial concepts and mental representations of
numerical magnitudes. The reader interested in a more precise analysis
of the analogical alignments discussed above can see Appendix A where
the original analysis presented by Navarrete and Dartnell (2017) was
adapted to the purposes of this study.
3. Method
3.1. Participants
Eighty-eight preschoolers, recruited from six preschool classrooms
within one large middle-class school of Chillán, Chile, participated in
this study. Parents of all participants signed an informed consent form
before testing. Data from one participant were eliminated because the
child did not attend to the pretest measurement session, as well as those
of other ten participants who attended to two or less play sessions from
a total of six sessions. We thus report here the data from 77 children
(52% girls, 62% Caucasian, 38% Mestizo) ranging in age from 3 years,
10 months to 5 years, 1 month (M = 4 years, 4 months; SD = 4 months).
Of these children, 7% received scholar subsidies from the state, 74%
belonged to the quintile of the population with highest incomes, and
69% of their mothers had a university degree. Within each one of the
six classrooms we assigned 40% of children to a control condition (CC)
and the remaining 60% of children were randomly distributed to two
versions of number line activities: half of them to the spatially aligned
condition (SA) and the other half to the spatial misalignment condition
(SM). For this assignment, we used a simple randomization method
ensuring that each participant had equal chances of being placed in the
spatial alignment group or in the spatial misalignment group (0.3 vs
0.3) and a slightly higher chance of being placed in the control group
(0.4). Descriptive statistics of the resulting groups are given in Table 1
where the number-line condition (NC) results from the pooling of the
SA and SM conditions and refers to all children who engaged in the
number line activities. The intervention was conducted by the first
author together with two male research assistants. The class’ educators
and paraprofessionals in charge of preschoolers were all females and
they were present during all stages of the intervention. They were
unaware of the aim of the research and abstained from interfering with
the experimental procedure.
3.2. Procedure
The full intervention lasted eight weeks, and its schedule was ad-
justed to satisfy school constraints and needs: Pretest measurements of
numerical and cognitive baseline skills were obtained during the first
two weeks, followed by a two-week inactivity period; the play sessions
were carried out in weeks 5 and 6, and finally posttest sessions in weeks
Table 1
Summary of the three groups considered in this study.
Condition N Discarded N Reported Female Proportion
Control 5 31 52%
SA-Number 1 25 60%
SM-Number 5 21 43%
Number (Total) 6 46 52%
Total (General) 11 77 52%
Note. No mean difference between groups is statistically significant.
Note. The last column (TADI) is a score on a general assessment of children’s cognitive development.
115
Contemporary Educational Psychology 54 (2018) 112–124
7 and 8. The inactivity period was due to the school organized a major
event; the intervention stopped these two weeks for teachers and chil-
dren rehearse public performances. For assessing number knowledge in
the pretest and posttest sessions, children met individually with an
experimenter who administered them four tasks. These 10–15 min
sessions were maintained in a room (usually shared by two children-
experimenter pairs) near to children’s usual classroom. For assessing
children’s cognitive development, an additional 15–20 min pretest
session was held with each child—on another day if necessary to pre-
vent children’s fatigue.
For the play sessions, the school was visited in six occasions. Each
participant was expected to engage in one activity session in each visit,
meaning that each child should have participated in six play sessions
during the whole intervention. In each visit to the school, we delivered
three play sessions, one after another, each one working with two
classrooms at the same time. To deliver one play session, participants
from two classrooms were pooled together and identified according to
their condition. Children participating in the number line activities (SA
and SM conditions) stayed in the room whereas children in the control
condition were conducted to a nearby room. The number-line activities
and control activities started in these two rooms at the same time and
lasted similar amounts of time. For the two experimental conditions,
children were arranged as shown by Fig. 2 those children in the spatial
alignment condition (SA) were randomly distributed in the racing
carpet depicted at the bottom, whereas children in the spatial mis-
alignment condition (SM) were randomly distributed in the racing
carpet depicted at the top. For the control condition, children were
randomly distributed on the two spatial orientations to the two parking
carpets of the control materials (see Materials). In each session of
number-line activities, each one of the four learning routines described
in the Materials section was deployed once. Similarly, in each session of
control activities, each one of the four control routines described in the
Materials section was deployed once.
Summarizing, we conducted 18 playing sessions for number-line
activities (SA and SM conditions) and 18 playing sessions for the control
group. The size of the groups participating in these 36 sessions varied
depending on children’s attendance to the school at the visiting days
(min = 12 children, max = 20 children). Although playing activities
were designed to be delivered in approximately 20 min, as soon as one
of the groups in the two rooms completed its whole activity, the other
group was asked to finish its activity as quickly as possible to ensure
that all groups would spend similar times on task (15–25 min). All in-
structional activities were delivered by the first author, whereas the
simultaneous control activities were delivered by a research assistant
who was deeply involved in the whole process of creation of the
learning routines. Educators and paraprofessionals in charge assisted us
to maintain discipline and management. To improve intervention fi-
delity, a register of issues occurring during the intervention was
maintained and playing sessions were videotaped (all sessions for the
experimental group and half of the sessions for the control group). An
examination of these records and videos suggests that there was high
fidelity of implementation for the intervention: average times of
Age (months) Attendance TADI
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
51.9 3.6 5.03 1.05 53.5 10.3
51.0 3.8 5.04 0.89 51 6.7
53.3 2.9 5.43 0.81 54.5 8.2
52.0 3.6 5.22 0.87 52.6 7.5
52.0 3.6 5.14 0.94 52.96 8.71
J.A. Navarrete et al.
execution did not differ between conditions, the number of learning
routines deployed with the experimental groups was four in all playing
sessions and the number of control routines deployed with the control
group was four (sessions 1–2) or three (sessions 3–6) in the videotaped
playing sessions. The intervention was carried as an addition to the
normal curriculum, meaning that children in all conditions underwent
their normal mathematical instruction in the school and that the ac-
tivities described above did not supplanted any mathematics instruc-
tion.
3.3. Materials
3.3.1. Learning materials for experimental groups
The learning materials designed in this study made a group of
children (at the bottom of Fig. 2) perceive numbers as increasing from
left to right (spatial analog aligned with the standard number line)
whereas at the same time another group of children in the same room
(at the top of Fig. 2) perceived numbers as increasing from right to left
(spatial analog misaligned with the standard number line). This design
of the materials allowed us to control most confounding variables such
as the intervention room, learning activities and teacher, among others.
The racing and parking carpets shown in Fig. 2 were built of wood
wrapped in synthetic leather; the size of the square boxes was
37 × 37 cm and the fences’ height was 7.5 cm. The turtle and rabbit
tokens were teddy figures adapted with a handle grip allowing the
experimenter to move them. Additionally, we used two sets of ten cards
(8 × 11 cm) numbered from 1 to 10 on one side. In each session, the
initial arrangement of children and materials was similar to what is
shown in Fig. 2 where each of the four instructional routines described
below were deployed once.
3.3.1.1. Learning Routine 1. All children were asked to carefully attend
to the story and participate by discussing and answering the questions
posed by the coordinator. This learning routine mimics Aesop’s fable
“the tortoise and the hare”: The experimenter told the beginning of the
fable in front of the children (see Fig. 2). Then, the coordinator
represented the race between the turtle and the rabbit in front of
children by slowly moving the tokens on the racing carpets and
emphasizing the “one-square advances” by saying aloud for example
that “the turtle moves from 3 to 4” while moving the turtle character
accordingly. The coordinator interrupted the story five times to inquire
children about the character who was “winning the race”, to afterwards
providing feedback to the group of children about the status of the race
by saying (accompanied by suitable gestures) that “the turtle is up on
the four, the rabbit is up on the eight, and so, the rabbit is winning the
competition by now”. This routine ended when one of the characters
crossed the final line.
3.3.1.2. Learning Routine 2. This short routine was performed twice in
each instructional session. The group of children was asked to
participate by singing a rhyme1 adapted to the context of Aesop’s
fable. While chanting this rhyme, the coordinator attracted children’s
attention by moving the tokens throughout the racing carpets in
synchrony with the lyrics. As the tokens were moved through the
racing carpet, children were encouraged to sing in synchrony with each
hop of the token.
3.3.1.3. Learning Routine 3. For this routine, each child was identified
with the number where they stood in the parking carpets (see Fig. 2).
Children were asked to pay attention to the numbers called by the
coordinator because in case they hear their own number called aloud,
they will participate actively: after the coordinator called a number, the
1
The rhyme is (spanish): “1, 2 y 3, el conejo va al revés; 4, 5, 6, la tortuga da un traspié;
7, 8, 9, el conejo no se mueve; y 10 la tortuga…. se come una lechuga”.
116
Contemporary Educational Psychology 54 (2018) 112–124
two children sitting on the appointed position (one for each parking
carpet) approached the coordinator, who showed them a set of cards
and asked them to draw one card at random. One after another, the two
children were instructed to move one character (rabbit/turtle) step by
step on the racing carpet from zero up to the number indicated by their
card. The other children were asked to observe carefully the moving
token and were encouraged to help their companions to perform the
task by counting the numbers as the token advanced through the racing
carpet. Once both children moved their tokens, the coordinator
instructed them to return to their sitting spots. At this point, the
coordinator performed the training task by inquiring the whole group
of children about which Figure had moved farthest and then provided
feedback by describing the status of the race (see Section 3.3.2). Once
this was done, the two tokens were returned to the starting boxes and
the cards were returned to the maze to repeat this procedure by calling
aloud the following number thus allowing the next pair of children to
participate. This routine ended when each participant had moved the
token one time.
3.3.1.4. Learning Routine 4. In this routine, children at one parking
carpet were asked to help the rabbit character to win the race; whereas
children in the other parking carpet were asked to help the turtle
character. To start, the coordinator called aloud the number one, and
children in these parking spots—one child per parking
carpet—competed against each other in a little game.2 The winner of
this game earned the right to advance the group’s character (rabbit/
turtle) one square forward towards the completion of the race. Once
this is done, the coordinator performed the training task by inquiring
the whole group of children about how close the two characters are:
“How many jumps must the rabbit do to catch up with the turtle?” and
then provided feedback by saying that “the rabbit must jump over the 1,
the 2, and the 3 to catch up with the turtle” while pointing the tokens
accordingly. Children were asked to participate by discussing and
answering the questions posed by the coordinator. This dynamic was
repeated by calling the remaining numbers until one of the two
characters finished the race.
3.3.2. Materials for the control group
The set of materials for the control group was identical to the set
described for the experimental group, except that each printed number
was replaced by a non-numerical illustration (car, airplane, boat, tree,
turtle, flower, frog, rabbit, bicycle and dog, instead of the numbers from
1 to 10, respectively). This decision was derived from an analysis
(presented in Appendix A) identifying the numbers on the boxes as a
key element to coordinate the spatial layout of the materials with the
intended representation of numbers. The four “control routines” are
identical3 to the four “learning routines” described above except that
instead of mentioning and referring to numbers, they mentioned and
referred to the illustrations printed on the boxes of the control mate-
rials. For example, in performing control routine 1, the experimenter
will say that “the turtle moves from the boat to the tree” rather than
“the turtle moves from 3 to 4” (see Section 3.3.2).
3.3.3. Standardized cognitive development measures
The children’s learning and development test, named TADI (for its
acronym in spanish), is a Chilean standardized tool to measure
2
Each child was given a card containing the number of the parking spot in which he/
she was located. The two competing children were instructed to (1) approach the zero
box, (2) run along the racing carpet up to the number in her card, (3) leave the card on
such box, (4) run towards the end of the racing carpet, and (5) return to his/her parking
spot, as quickly as possible. The tokens were temporarily moved to the area between the
racing carpets, to allow children to run along the racing carpets. The winner of the game
was the child finishing first.
3
The rhyme in Routine 2 below was modified in the described manner for the control
group, but children did not like it and it was omitted in sessions 3–6.
J.A. Navarrete et al.
children’s development (from 3 months to six years of age) in the lin-
guistic, cognitive, motor, and socio-affective dimensions (Edwards &
Pardo, 2013). This test has convergent and construct validity (Armijo,
Galaz, Edwards, & Pardo, 2016). We used TADI’s cognitive dimension
score as a control measure in our analyses. This score measures cog-
nitive development through a battery of tasks including the identifi-
cation of common objects, the building of geometric Figs with wood
blocks and the ordering of illustrated cards in relation to a story.
3.3.4. Measures of numerical knowledge
Children answered four numerical tests (counting, magnitude
comparison, numeral identification and number line estimation) at the
pretest and posttest sessions. This battery of tasks has been used ex-
tensively in previous research about promoting preschooler’s numerical
knowledge (Ramani & Siegler, 2008; Ramani, Siegler, & Hitti, 2012;
Siegler & Booth, 2008; Siegler & Ramani, 2009; Vitale, Black, & Swart,
2014). These four tasks were coded into tablet apps (using Android
Studio IDE) and administered by using tablets (size 20 × 11 cm).
Children were asked to perform the tasks with neither a timeout nor any
other kind of pressure and, in case they showed some sign of tenseness
due to the tasks, they were given words of relief and encouragement.
3.3.4.1. Counting task. Children were asked to count from 1 to 10
(orally). Scores were registered in the tablet by recording the largest
number to which children counted before making the first mistake (e.g.
the score of a child who counted “1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10” was 5). In this
task, the dependent measure is the number of numbers counted
correctly before the first error. This task has been used in prior
studies on promoting children’s numerical knowledge (e.g. Siegler &
Ramani, 2008, 2009; Ramani et al., 2012).
3.3.4.2. Numeral identification task. Children were presented the
numerals from 1 to 10—one at a time—in the middle of the screen in
a random order. They had to name the numeral, or to say “I do not
know” otherwise. In this task, the dependent measure is the number of
correct answers and thus the task was scored as this number of correct
responses. This task has been successfully used in previous studies on
children’s numerical knowledge (Siegler & Ramani, 2008, 2009;
Ramani et al., 2012).
3.3.4.3. Numerical magnitude comparison task. Children watched
screens displaying two different single-digit numbers (excluding
zero), side by side, and had to choose the numerically larger one. The
task started with two practice items with feedback, followed by 18
experimental items without feedback. From the 36 possible pairs of
numbers, nine pairs were chosen at random for the experimental items
and ordered in a way to avoid presenting more than three consecutive
pairs with the larger number located at the same side of the screen.
These nine pairs were presented once and then once again: for each
pair, the two numbers were displayed in a left-right order first, and then
in the opposite order. A comparison was coded as correct only if the
child responded to both presentations of the same pair correctly. For
this task, the dependent measure was the number of correct answers
and thus the total score of this task varied from 0 to 9. Similar tasks has
been used in prior studies about promotion of children’s numerical
knowledge (Siegler & Ramani, 2008, 2009; Ramani et al., 2012).
3.3.4.4. Number line estimation task. Children were presented, in the
middle of the screen, a 17-cm horizontal line, with endpoints marked
with the numbers 0 and 10. A non-zero single digit number was
displayed approximately 5 cm above the left endpoint of the line, as
well as a pointer indicating the zero position on the line. The
experimenter first asked children to identify and name the number on
top, and then, he would say “If this is where 0 goes (pointing) and this is
where 10 goes (pointing), where does N go?” to instruct children to
point to the corresponding location on the line. This task has been
117
Contemporary Educational Psychology 54 (2018) 112–124
widely used in prior studies about children’s numerical knowledge (R.
S. Siegler & Ramani, 2008, 2009; Ramani et al., 2012; Vitale et al.,
2014) and it is predictive of arithmetic learning (Siegler & Booth,
2008). This task consisted of 18 items: the numbers from one to nine
were randomly ordered and presented to children twice. For this task,
the dependent measure is the percent absolute error (PAE) that
measures the error in children’s estimates which is based on the
distance between the correct location of the single-digit number and
the location indicated by children
Presented Number −Estimate
PAE = × 100
Scale of Estimates
For example, if a child was asked to estimate the location of 5 on a
0–10 number line and placed the mark at the location corresponding to
8.2, the PAE score would be 32% [(|5 − 8.2|/10) * 100]. As PAE scores
depends directly on the spatial configuration of the number line that is
used to obtain the number’s location estimates, it is worth mentioning
that we expect performance differences between children in the ex-
perimental groups (spatial alignment vs spatial misalignment condi-
tions) for this measure of numerical knowledge.
4. Results
4.1. Multivariate analyses
We examined multivariate effects of condition and session across
number line estimation, magnitude comparison, counting and numeral
identification tasks. A 3 (condition: spatial alignment, spatial mis-
alignment, or control) × 2 (session: pretest or posttest) repeated-mea-
sures multivariate analysis of variance was conducted on the four
measures described above. Effects emerged for session, F(4, 74) = 6.76,
p = .011, η2p = .084, and for the Condition × Session interaction, F(8,
148) = 6.38, p < .01, η2p = .15, reflecting dissimilar gains of knowl-
edge for the three different conditions (SA, SM and CC). To better un-
derstand this interaction, and to examine the consistency of results
across tasks, we conducted univariate analysis for each task. As a pre-
requisite for these univariate analyses, we conducted information-
measuring analysis with the aim to evidence that there is no distinction
between the SA and SM conditions in regard to the measures of
counting, identification and numerical comparison, but that such dis-
tinction is important for the analysis of the number line estimation task.
4.2. Information-measuring analyses
We estimated the quality of four competing statistical models by
seeking a balance between its complexity—roughly, its degrees of
freedom (df)—and its goodness of fit to data (Dayton, 2003). The cor-
rected Akaike Information Criterion (AIC’c) was used to estimate the
discrepancy between a particular statistical model and the hypothetical
“true model” that generates the data (i.e. the Kulback-Leibler in-
formation measure). The same statistical models to be used in the
forthcoming univariate analysis are used in this analysis as well. For
example, for analyzing the counting task we will build a logistic re-
gression model, and the same model is used here as the basis to gen-
erate four alternative models which differ only in how children are
distributed among conditions. Specifically, the first model pools to-
gether children who performed the embodied number-line tasks (SA
and SM conditions pooled together) and preserves the Control Condi-
tion. This first model is denoted by the pair (NC = number condition,
CC = control condition). The second model splits children in the three
main conditions and it is denoted by (CC, SA, SM). The third model
preserves children in the spatial alignment condition and pools together
children in the spatial misalignment condition and the control condi-
tion; it is denoted by (SA, ●). The last model preserves children in the
spatial misalignment condition and pools together children in the
J.A. Navarrete et al.
Table 2
Information measures of the four models fitted to the experimental data.
Alternative Models Counting Identification
AIC’c wt df AIC’c
(CC, NC) 55.5 .51 4 655.6
(CC, SA, SM) 57.5 .18 5 656.0
(SA, ●) 57.1 .23 4 656.9
(SM, ●) 59.3 .08 4 656.9
Note. Shaded cells indicate the best model for each knowledge measure.
spatial alignment condition and control condition; it is denoted by (SM,
●). These four models can be compared against each other according to
how well they adjust the experimental data: the better a model fits to
the data; the smaller is its AIC’c measure. This comparison is done by
computing relative weights for each model as
wti =
(
exp −
Δi AIC
2 )
∑ exp −
j
( Δj AIC
2 )
where Δi AIC is the AIC’c difference between the i-th model and the
model achieving the minimum AIC’c (Burnham & Anderson, 2002, p.
75). As these weights always add up to 1, a useful interpretation of
them is that each weight represents the fraction of the observed data
that can be best explained by the respective model.
Weights in Table 2 show strong evidence that children’s perfor-
mance in the counting task naturally splits in two groups, namely all
those children that performed the embodied number line activities
versus those in the control group—the weight of (CC, NC) is .51 versus a
second best of .23. Also there is evidence that the (CC, NC) model is also
appropriate for analyzing the numerical identification task (weight of
0.36, second best of 0.28). For the number comparison task, our results
were mixed, as the three models (CC, NC), (SA, ●) and (SM, ●) had all
very similar weights. Finally, strong evidence supports that the best
model for analyzing PAE scores is to consider the three separated
conditions (CC, SA and SM; weight of .83 against a second best of .11).
4.3. Improvement by task
To improve comparability among studies, we run the same uni-
variate statistical analysis performed in prior studies about promoting
numerical knowledge (Ramani et al., 2012). We performed a regression
analysis for the counting score, and built an ANCOVA model for each
one of the other three tasks. The means reported below for the ANCOVA
analyses are adjusted for participants’ score on a generalized cognitive
measure (TADI) as a covariate; so they represent projections of the
scores that children would have obtained if they had performed equally
well on the TADI test that measures children’s cognitive development.
Our main prediction was to observe greater gains in numerical
knowledge from pretest to posttest for children who did the embodied
number line activities when compared to those children who performed
the control activities. To confirm this, we conducted planned compar-
isons between gains in the outcome measures for children who per-
formed number line activities and children in the control group by
using paired t-tests. We also predicted differences of performance in the
number line estimation task between the spatial alignment subgroup
and the spatial misalignment subgroup of children who performed the
embodied number line activities, and consequently, the analysis of PAE
scores considers such distinction. As a summary, Table 3 report the raw
score gains in four measures of numerical knowledge.
4.3.1. Counting
The proportion of children who counted correctly up to 10 at pretest
was highly similar for both groups (.55 in the Control Condition and .56
Contemporary Educational Psychology 54 (2018) 112–124
Comparison PAE Scores
wt df AIC’c wt df AIC’c wt df
.36 7 676.5 .33 7 1129.9 .05 7
.28 9 679.2 .08 9 1124.2 .83 9
.18 7 677.0 .27 7 1128.2 .11 7
.18 7 676.6 .32 7 1133.3 .01 7
in the Embodied Number Line Conditions). Some ceiling effects were
observed for the posttest scores. The proportion of children who could
count correctly up to 10 after the intervention was analyzed by con-
ducting a logistic regression to predict the probability of children
counting correctly up to 10 at posttest. As predictors for this model we
considered TADI scores, condition (Control vs. Number) and the pretest
counting scores. Overall, the model significantly predicted the odds of
correctly counting up to 10 at posttest, χ 2 (3) = 18.7, p < .001.
Likelihood ratio tests showed that counting scores at pretest (p < .001)
as well as Condition (p = .042) predicted counting correctly up to 10 at
posttest, whereas TADI scores did not contributed significantly. One
point of increase in the pretest counting score was associated with an
increase in the odds of counting correctly up to 10 at posttest by a factor
of 1.69, 95%CI [1.32, 2.30]. Also, children in the Embodied Number
Line Conditions had higher odds than those in the Control Condition of
counting correctly up to 10 at posttest by a factor of 4.89, 95% CI [1.06,
29.93].
For the planned comparisons, we conducted McNemar tests to ex-
amine whether the proportion of children who counted correctly up to
10 changed from pretest to posttest, due to the effect of Condition. In
the Control Condition, the increase in the number of children who
counted correctly from pretest to posttest was not statistically sig-
nificant (55% vs. 74%, χ 2 (1, N = 31) = 3.12 , p = .077) whereas in the
Embodied Number Line Conditions there was a significant increase
(56% vs. 87%), χ 2 (1, N = 46) = 12.07, p < .001. Regarding the
Spatial Alignment (SA) and Spatial Misalignment (SM) subgroups of the
Embodied Number Line group, we observed similar proportions of
children counting correctly up to 10 at pretest (56% vs. 57%) and at
posttest (88% vs. 86%).
4.3.2. Numeral identification
A 2(Condition: Control or Number) × 2(Session: Pretest or Posttest)
repeated-measures ANCOVA with Session as the repeated measure and
TADI scores as covariate indicated that the number of correctly iden-
tified numerals varied significantly by Session, F(1, 72) = 7.25,
p < .01, ηp2 = .08, in addition to detecting a significant
Session × Condition interaction, F(1,72) = 5.08, p = .027, ηp2 = .06.
This interaction resulted from greater gains by children who performed
the embodied number line activities: The mean number of correct
identifications of children who attended to the control activities im-
proved from 6.10 to 6.81, t(30) = 2.93, p < .01, d = 0.29, while those
in the embodied number line condition improved from 5.71 to 7.19, t
(45) = 6.37, p < .0001, d = 0.52. A t-test (using Welch’s correction to
account for the different variances) showed a statistically significant
difference in the gain scores of these two conditions (0.71 vs. 1.48), t
(70.7) = 2.29, p = .024, d = 0.52. Regarding the spatial alignment and
the spatial misalignment subgroups of the embodied number line con-
ditions, we observed similar gains of scores (1.48 vs. 1.47).
4.3.3. Numerical magnitude comparison
A 2(Condition: Control or Number) × 2(Session: Pretest or Posttest)
repeated-measures ANCOVA with Session as the repeated measure and
TADI scores as covariate revealed significant effects of Session, F(1,
72) = 5.20, p = .025, ηp2 = .04 and of TADI scores, F(1, 72) = 10.59,
118
J.A. Navarrete et al.
Table 3
Raw score gains in four measures of numerical knowledge.
Condition counting (0–10) Identification (0–10)
Pre Post Gain Pre Post
Control 7.9 8.97 1.07 6.13 6.84
Alignment 7.6 9.68 2.08 6.16 7.64
Misalignment 7.71 9.48 1.77 5.14 6.62
p < .01, ηp2 = .09. The Condition × Session interaction was not sta-
tistically significant, F(1, 72) = 0.66, p = .41, ηp2 = .006. Planned
comparisons showed that the mean number of correct responses of
children in the control group improved from 36% to 46%, t(30) = 2.50,
p = .018, d = 0.37 whereas in the embodied number line group im-
proved from 35% to 51%, t(45) = 3.77, p < .001, d = 0.70. A Welch’s
t-test showed no difference between the score gains of the Control and
Embodied Number Line conditions (11% vs. 16%), t(71.07) = 0.83,
p = .1, d = 0.19. Regarding the spatial alignment and spatial mis-
alignment subgroups of the embodied number line group, there were
similar mean score gains for both of them (15% and 16%, respectively).
4.3.4. Number line estimation
A 3(Condition: Control or Spatial-Alignment or Spatial-
Misalignment) × 2(Session: Pretest or Posttest) repeated-measures
ANCOVA with Session as the repeated measure and TADI scores as
covariate showed a non-significant effect for the covariate TADI scores,
F(1, 70) = 3.43, p = .067, ηp2 = .03 and a significant effect of Session, F
(1, 70) = 21.66, p < .001, ηp2 = .18. As predicted, a when designing teaching methods aimed to promote the learning of
Session × Condition interaction was statistically significant, F(2,
70) = 3.25, p = .044, ηp2 = .07. Planned comparisons showed that the
interaction effect resulted specifically from improvements in the accu-
racy of estimates of children in the spatial alignment Condition. These
children decreased their PAE scores from 32.99 to 23.89, t(24) = 4.95,
p < .0001, d = 0.85, whereas no significant differences were present
for either children in the spatial misalignment condition (30.89–26.44,
t(20) = 1.65, p = .11, d = 0.41) or for children in the control condition
(28.45–26.06, t(30) = 1.46, p = .15, d = 0.23).
Convergent evidence supporting the differences between the nu-
merical representations generated by children in the SA and SM con-
ditions was provided by correlation analysis between pretest and
posttest PAE scores (see Fig. 3). In the control group, pretest and
posttest PAE scores were highly correlated r(29) = .61, p < .001, and
a similar pattern held for the spatial alignment group, r(23) = .63,
p < .001. In contrast, the correlation of the two scores in the spatial
misalignment group was weak and not statistically significant r
(19) = .34, p = .13.
5. Discussion
This work emphasized the complexities underlying children’s
learning of natural numbers. To establish that analogical alignments
underpin the mechanism by which children map innate representations
of magnitude to numerals in their count list, this study assessed the
influence of spatial information in the formation of numerical re-
presentations. Our results indicate that children under the space-
number alignment condition had greater performances in the task of
number line estimation which indicates that alignments between the
spatial configuration of the training materials and the intended nu-
merical representations influenced the numerical representations gen-
erated by children. More precisely, the resulting numerical re-
presentations were linked not only to innate representations of
magnitude but to additional spatial information that was implicit in the
training activities. This suggests that children generated their numerical
representations by giving structure to their incipient numerical
119
Contemporary Educational Psychology 54 (2018) 112–124
Comparison (0–9) PAE (%)
Gain Pre Post Gain Pre Post Gain
0.71 3.29 4.26 0.97 28.45 26.06 2.39
1.48 3.08 4.44 1.36 32.99 23.89 9.10
1.48 3.29 4.76 1.47 30.89 26.44 4.45
knowledge with basis on the spatial structure observed in the learning
materials that was highlighted by the coordinator. This interpretation is
consistent with literature indicating that at least some mental schemes
of abstract concepts involve spatial information (Landy & Goldstone,
2007; Goldstone, Landy, & Son, 2010; Vitale et al., 2014) and that
spatial orientation is a crucial feature of number line representation of
numbers (Dehaene, Bossini, & Giraux, 1993; Dehaene & Brannon, 2011;
Núñez & Cooperrider, 2013). On the light of these observations, we
argue below that analogical alignments are one of the key mechanisms
that allow children to associate numerals and innate representations of
magnitude. In a more educational aspect, our results show that embo-
died number line games with a set of different prompts is a potent way
to engage kids in number activities and improve their numerical
knowledge in counting, number symbol acquisition, numerical com-
parison and number line estimation. Since these games were designed
by drawing on theoretical analysis of analogical alignments between
children’s spatial knowledge and the intended numerical representa-
tions, the observed improvements in numerical knowledge lead us to
think that spatial information is an important aspect to be considered
numbers.
5.1. Analogy and the formation of numerical representations
Carey (2009, p. 340) has posed questions about the cognitive me-
chanism that allow children to build a mapping between numerals and
internal representations of magnitude. Two possibilities have been
suggested: The first alternative indicates that children learn the pairing
of the analog magnitude symbol for 6 with “six” by means of associative
learning. The second alternative outlines a process whereby children
draws on the order information contained in the count list to infer a rule
“later in the list implies greater number” (Corre & Carey, 2007). Our
results suggests that the first alternative cannot hold: the two analogical
representations given to children in the experimental conditions (SA
and SM) displayed the same spatial distances associated to the same
numerals. Associative learning alone predicts that the two experimental
groups would have obtained similar performances on the number line
estimation task because numerals presented in this task would have
evoked the magnitudes associated to them. In contrast, the differential
performances observed between the two experimental groups support
the second alternative. Le Corre and Carey (2007) pointed out that
children may infer a rule such as “later in the [count] list implies
greater number magnitude”, and use this rule to complete the mapping
of the entire numeral list to innate representations of magnitude. Fur-
thermore, the analysis by Navarrete and Dartnell (2017) suggests that
children’s incipient representations of numbers were aligned through
analogical alignments to the spatial structure cued in the learning ac-
tivities; thus leading to the formation of numerical representations of
magnitude with links to spatial structure (such as “1 is to the left of 2”).
Taken together, the above observations suggest that the rule proposed
by Le Corre and Carey is implemented through analogical alignments
between children’s representations of number (the count list) and ev-
eryday experiences of magnitude. This might explain the fact that, in
tasks of estimating the number of dots in a set, adults improve dra-
matically their performance when there is a calibration trial (e.g., being
told how many dots are in a sample of 150 dots) because a first trial
J.A. Navarrete et al.
Fig. 3. Scatterplots showing pretest and posttest PAE scores per child. PAE scores measure errors, and thus reductions represent improvement in numerical
knowledge. Points below the dotted lines represent children improving PAE scores after the intervention. The spatial alignment group shows benefits for most
children. In contrast, the spatial misalignment group has children with large improvements (e.g. points 1–3) but also children with declines in their scores (e.g points
4–6).
might trigger an analogical mapping between various samples of dots
and their associated representations of magnitude.
The above interpretation accounts for the performances observed in
this study. At administering the posttest number line estimation task,
each child was reminded in several occasions that the number zero was
at the left endpoint of the number line and that the number ten was at
the right endpoint. Nevertheless, some children in the spatial mis-
alignment group (SM) ignored this information and responded as if
these two numbers were on the opposite endpoints of the number line,
that is, 10 on the left and 0 on the right: if the screen presented the
number 2, these children would move the pointer to a position close to
the number 8 in the standard number line. Furthermore, some children
attempted to use information that cannot be encoded sole by re-
presentations of magnitude (such as spatial points of reference and
direction of movement among others). In summary, preschoolers
seemed to rely on a mental model of the number line observed during
training: children in the spatial-number alignment group required al-
most no effort to align their internal representation of numbers with the
standard number line displayed in the number line task whereas chil-
dren in the spatial-number misalignment group required more effort to
perform the required analogical alignment (see a similar approach in
Vitale et al., 2014). The performances observed in the remaining nu-
merical tasks are explained within the same frame: The counting task
asked children to count up to ten, the number identification task pre-
sented children with a numerical symbol to be identified and the nu-
merical comparison task presented two numerical symbols to be com-
pared. These tasks provided children with no visuospatial cues that
could agree (or interfere) with the spatial information integrated in
their numerical representations acquired by training in the two ex-
perimental groups.
120
Contemporary Educational Psychology 54 (2018) 112–124
5.2. Analogical mappings and the design of instruction
Although the sizes of the effects reported in this study are smaller
than those reported by Siegler and Ramani in their laboratory studies
with regard to the promotion of numerical knowledge through playing
board games (2008, 2009), the effect sizes reported here are at least
comparable with those observed when the original board games were
applied to intervene real classrooms (Ramani et al., 2012). This point is
important because many interventions that are effective in laboratory
settings frequently are ineffective in classrooms due to numerous fac-
tors that influence the effectiveness of school interventions (Newcombe
et al., 2009). A relevant consideration for the present study is that the
learning materials and activities were different from the original board
games used by Siegler and Ramani, but still the school intervention was
able to replicate the learning outcomes. Hence, the approach taken here
to the design of learning materials and educational activities may have
an intrinsic value. Specifically, the effectiveness of the school inter-
vention demonstrates that considering analogies between instructional
activities and intended mental representations is an informative ex-
ercise as part of the process of instruction design. This adds up to a wide
body of evidence supporting the positive impact of the effective use of
analogies in teaching and learning (Araya et al., 2010; Gentner,
Loewenstein, & Thompson et al., 2003; Richland & McDonough, 2010;
Richland et al., 2012; Richland, Zur, & Holyoak, 2007). Hence, deeply
understanding the analogical mappings involved in the formation of
conceptual representations can provide guidance in the process of de-
signing instruction.
However, it is an open question whether the design approach out-
lined here can be extended to other subjects and contents. In case this
was possible, relevant areas for future research might include the
teaching of fractions by using areas (Saxe, Taylor, McIntosh, &
Gearhart, 2005; Saxe et al., 2007) or number lines (Booth & Newton,
J.A. Navarrete et al.
2012) and the teaching of linear equations by using tilting balances
(Araya et al., 2010). Extending the method outlined here would open a
path to research an important question, namely that of efficacy of
teaching mathematics with concrete manipulatives (Carbonneau,
Marley, & Selig, 2013).
5.3. Limitations and further research
During the intervention period, participants were exposed to the
scholar intervention in addition to their regular mathematics lessons
and additional learning stimulus provided by their teachers and/or
families (maybe fostered by a Hawthorne effect). This is reflected in the
gains of knowledge obtained by the control group in the tasks of nu-
meral identification and numerical comparison (and a trend towards
significance in the counting task). Our sample of children was moti-
vated by the relative easiness of conducting the study within one large
school but this implies that the findings presented here are limited to a
subgroup of the population. More precisely, the intervened school
mostly serves to lower and upper middle-class families where roughly
seventy percent of its population comes from safe environments with
low levels of educational vulnerability. Hence, our findings can be ex-
tended to spanish-speakers, middle-class, Chilean children with low
levels of educational vulnerability and ages between 4 and 5 years. Our
findings are also limited also to the particular subject matter taught,
namely the numbers from one to ten and their structure.
Performance differences between the Number Condition and the
Control Condition may be subjected to an experimenter effect because
the playful activities were delivered by different individuals to these
two groups of children. Also, our study had highly motivated project
personnel conducting all aspects of the school intervention, and this
motivation might have interacted with the nature of the learning ac-
tivity. Effects of this sort have been found in reading programs
(Whitehurst et al., 1994).
Two relevant questions related to this study are still open to further
research. The first one asks about whether children in the SM-group
would have performed better than children in the SA-group in an “or-
ientation-reversed task” of number line estimation. A positive answer to
this question would provide evidence in line with prior research in-
dicating that abstract schemas include perceptual information
(Goldstone et al., 2010; Landy & Goldstone, 2007) and with claims that
space and number are entangled in human cognition (Dehaene &
Brannon, 2011; Núñez & Cooperrider, 2013). This would also add to
current views of higher cognition that challenge classical accounts
where processing of mathematical knowledge is often seen as mediated
by abstract, symbolic, amodal representations of knowledge in-
dependent of sensory systems (Landy & Goldstone, 2007; Markman &
Dietrich, 2000). A second question for further research has to do with
making further improvements to the teaching strategy presented here.
As an example, children in the two experimental conditions were given
two different analogical representations of numbers, one more akin to
positive numbers (SA condition) and another more akin to negative
numbers (SM condition). Research in analogical coding suggests that a
systematic comparison between two analogically related situations
promotes comprehension and abstraction (Kurtz, Miao, & Gentner,
2001). Hence, it is possible that a new group of children exposed to
both analogical representations (Alignment and Misalignment) develop
a further abstraction of numbers that would be independent of the or-
ientation of the two representations. This might provide an effective
and easy-to-implement method to promote numerical knowledge in
schools.
5.4. Implications for instruction
Our results suggest that spatial features of training activities play an
important role in learning mathematics thus opposing classical views of
cognition where mathematical reasoning is taken to be the
121
Contemporary Educational Psychology 54 (2018) 112–124
paradigmatic case of symbolic reasoning and whose execution relies on
the use of abstract operations (Inhelder & Piaget, 1958). As a practical
implication, our results highlight that considering spatial information in
the design of mathematics instruction might be a fruitful approach for
teaching numbers. Teachers often employ small sets of entities as
concrete manipulatives to build children’s concept of numerical mag-
nitude by leveraging the cardinality of the set as a concrete re-
presentation of magnitude. This study suggests that teachers should use
spatial magnitudes (in addition to cardinalities) to better support the
formation of numerical representations. Furthermore, the materials
presented in this work may have certain advantages with respect to
concrete representations based on small-sets as their design is based on
analogies that align the spatial structure of the learning materials with
the intended numerical representations (see details in Appendix A).
This feature of the materials might foster the promotion of children’s
numerical knowledge due to processes of analogical learning (Kurtz
et al., 2001).
We recorded comments given by educators and paraprofessionals in
charge of the intervened classrooms in regard to the learning activities
performed during the school intervention. The proportion of positive
comments was higher than the proportion of neutral or negative com-
ments (4:1), thus revealing that the overall experience of the school
intervention was positive. Although further research is necessary to
provide accurate information about specific features of the interven-
tion, we believe that the playfulness dimension of the intervention is a
significant one. In general, children were able to sustain relatively long
periods of concentration and enjoyed the learning activities which in
turn stimulated children-adult interactions involving mathematical
knowledge in a playful manner. This point is significant since play is a
basic aspect of early childhood education (Lerkkanen et al., 2012;
Singer, 2013, 2015; Van der Aalsvoort & Broadhead, 2009) and elite
performers are typically introduced to their future domain in a playful
manner (Bloom, 1985). However, as part of a broader trend that view
playful and academic activities as incompatible, many preschool and
early elementary classrooms have moved away from the use of playful
experiences to scripted curricula as a way to meet standard educational
goals and assessments (Miller & Almon, 2009). In this respect, teachers
have been subdued to the dilemma of choosing between playfulness or
academics (Viadero, 2007). But this dilemma may not be a real one.
This study adds to a large body of research suggesting that playful ex-
periences can be gently scaffolded by a teacher to promote curricular
goals (Fisher, Hirsh-Pasek, Golinkoff, Singer, & Berk, 2011; Hirsh-
Pasek, Golinkoff, Berk, & Singer, 2008). Nowadays, there is a small but
increasing variety of alternatives that can be used by teachers and
schools to promote numerical knowledge in their children through
playful experiences. In addition to the materials presented here, there is
“The Great Race” developed by Ramani and Siegler (2008), Siegler and
Ramani (2009) and Ramani et al. (2012) and a software designed to
improve young children’s number sense that has shown promising re-
sults in kindergartners and 7-to 9-year-olds suffering from dyscalculia
(Wilson, Revkin, Cohen, Cohen, & Dehaene, 2006; Wilson, Dehaene,
Dubois, & Fayol, 2009).
6. Conclusions
Our findings show that mathematical training can lead to the for-
mation of numerical representations integrated with spatial informa-
tion implicit in the training activities. Hence, spatial information should
be taken into account when designing learning activities that promote
early mathematical knowledge. Additionally, we argued that analogy
making is one of the mechanisms that allows children to associate nu-
merals and representations of magnitude; thus shedding some light on
the role that analogy plays at the formation of numerical representa-
tions. In a broader aspect, this study shows that interrogating the
analogy at the foundation of a number line game can highlight key
decisions of instructional design that may have large impacts on
J.A. Navarrete et al. Contemporary Educational Psychology 54 (2018) 112–124

children's learning. Therefore, this study adds to literature showing that
the adequate use of analogies helps to promote learning outcomes. In
this respect, we urge designers of instruction to inspect and refine the
design method outlined here since its extension to other teaching sub-
jects and domains might contribute to using analogy as a foundation for
instructional design and to research the impact of concrete manip-
ulatives in the learning of mathematics.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the INNOVA-BÍO-BÍO grants
13.1984-EM.CIE and 14.541-EM.CIE. Also, this research was partly
funded by the Universidad del Bío-Bío grant 124009 3/D and FAPEI
Fund, and from the associative research Program of Conicyt (http://
www.conicyt.cl/; CONICYT/PIA Basal Funds for Centers of Excellence:
grant FB0003 “Centro de Investigación Avanzada en Educación CIAE”
and grant PFB03 “Centro de Modelamiento Matemático CMM”). Thanks
to Lindsey Richland for useful comments and discussions. Thanks to
Alejandro Fuentes for personal involvement in this research project.
And thanks to anonymous reviewers whose comments helped to im-
prove the presentation of this article.

Appendix A

A.1. A formal model for a spatial analogy that promotes numerical knowledge

Navarrete and Dartnell (2017) applied a formal model for analogy called mathematical model of analogy (MMA) to analyze Siegler and Ramani’s
board games. We revisit such analysis and adapt it to our study with the aim to provide a precise understanding of the analogy that underlies our
training activities. The MMA assumes a dual processing in higher cognition (Evans, 2008) and uses relational representations of knowledge (Halford,
Wilson, & Phillips, 2010). Relational knowledge is conceptualized as bindings between relation symbols and sets of ordered tuples of elements: the
numeric relation “greater than” can be represented through the symbol “X > Y” which is bound to the collection of all pairs of numbers (x, y) where
x is greater than y—as in (5, 3) or (8, 1). These bindings allow evaluating a symbolic representation such as “X > Y” through an interpretational
mapping that assigns semantics (numbers) to each one of the roles X and Y (symbols). In terms of relational knowledge, the numerical representation
that is desired for children to learn is depicted in Fig. A1b. and A1d. (relation symbols and semantics, respectively) where the arrow β refers to any
possible interpretational mapping. For example, if β(X) = 5 and β(Y) = 3, then the relational knowledge encoded in this numeric domain entails that
β(successor(X)) = 6, β(|X − Y|) = 2 and β(X > Y) = TRUE. It may be worth noticing that these kind of interactions, namely interactions between
syntax and semantics, are claimed to be at the core of higher cognition since they characterize relational knowledge and its use in reasoning (Evans,
2008; Halford et al., 2010).
The numeric domain described above can be delivered to children through the crafting of an analogy whose source domain that is well known by
learners (Gentner et al., 2003; Holyoak, 2012; Richland et al., 2007). Our aim is to use children’s knowledge about space, represented here as ten
spatial boxes (Fig. A1c). along with its spatial structure (Fig. A1a). The mapping α depicted in Fig. A1. refers to the syntax-semantics interactions that
occur in this spatial domain. In this context, conceptions such as the “stroll distance between two boxes” and the “next box” arise naturally. Whether
this spatial setting is an adequate analog to facilitate the generation of numerical representations is a question that can be answered in a precise
manner. We just need to define with precision the analogical mappings between the two domains and to check that they satisfy the constraints that
characterize analogical mappings.
The MMA describes the educational analogy as a pair of mappings (H, h): The mapping H operates at a symbolic level by associating (a) the
comparison of two numbers with the spatial comparison of two boxes, (b) the distance between two numbers with the stroll distance between two
boxes, (c) the successor of a number with the concept of the “next box”, (d) the X-role with the X-role, and (e) the Y-role with the Y-role (Fig. A1a and
b). The mapping h operates at a semantic level by associating the numbers in the numerical domain with the boxes in the spatial domain: It assigns
the number 1 to the first box (from left to right), the number 2 to the second box, and so on (see Fig. A1c and d). This mapping h is implemented by
printing the numbers on the corresponding boxes and it induces a coordination mechanism between the two domains: the tokens depicted in Fig. A1
indicate that α(X) is the 5th box and that α(Y) is the 3rd box, as well as indicating that β(X) = 5 and that β(Y) = 3. This coordination mechanism is
integrated into the model by setting that β assigns the role X to the filler h(α(X)). In other words, the mapping β depends on α because β(X) = h
(α(X)) for any role X. This observation is important as it determines the condition for analogical alignment as described below.
The pair of mappings H and h is considered an analogy if they have the ability to accommodate to any α-mapping and its associated β-mapping.
This can be better explained graphically: once the roles X and Y are bonded to their fillers, any symbol in the source (Fig. A1a). can be associated to a

Fig. A1. A formal model (MMA) describing how a spatial domain of knowledge (left) is the source of an analogy whose target is a numerical domain (right). The pair
of mappings (H, h) is an analogy because they are able to accommodate to any interpretational mappings α and β so that the H-β and the α-h paths are equivalent.

122
J.A. Navarrete et al. Contemporary Educational Psychology 54 (2018) 112–124

Table A1
Preservation of structure from source to target.
Source Target

s α α(s) h h(α(s)) β H(s)

=β(H(s))

X → 3rd Box → 3 ← X
Y → 5th Box → 5 ← Y
stroll_distance(X,Y) → 2nd Box → 2 ← |X – Y|
step_to_right(X) → 4th Box → 4 ← successor(X)
step_to_right(Y) → 6th Box → 6 ← successor(Y)
add_strolls(X,Y) → 8th Box → 8 ← X+Y
X to left of Y → true → true ← X<Y

Note. The configuration of the tokens in Fig. A1. determines the interpretation mappings α and β. The mapping α is described by the first three columns whereas β is
described by the last three columns. Each row details the preserving of structure from source to target as given by the equality h(α(s)) = β(H(s)).

number in the target (Fig. A1d). by two different methods: (i) first following the vertical arrow α and then the horizontal arrow h or (ii) first
following the horizontal arrow H and then the vertical arrow β. The assignments made by these two alternative routes must be equivalent for any α-
mapping and its associated β-mapping. In other words, the diagram in Fig. A1 must “commute” for any α-mapping (i.e. h○α = β○H). This condition
is just a formal statement of the consistency requirement for analogical mappings by Holyoak and Thagard (1989).
The analogical condition described above involves a structural comparison between the two domains as the commutativity of the diagrams
implies a similarity which, for the particular case of the α-mapping depicted in Fig. A1, is illustrated in Table A1. Notice that the proposed condition
is meaningful because once the roles X and Y have been bound to their fillers, the values assigned by α and β to the remaining relation symbols are
independently determined by the relational knowledge coded in each domain. In this manner, when α(X) = 5th box, a spatial reasoning implies that
α(next_box(X)) = 6th box, which is independent of knowing (or not) that β(successor(X)) = 6. To create a contrast, let us describe a situation where
the analogical condition is not satisfied. Let us consider a new model built up from Fig. A1. wherein the relation symbol “successor” is replaced by
“predecessor”. This new model does not describe an analogy since, when α(X) = 5th box, a spatial reasoning implies that h○α(next_box(X)) = 6 but
numerical knowledge indicates that β○H(next_box(X)) = 4. As 4 is not equal to 6, the diagrams fail to commute (i.e. h○α ≠ β○H) and the ana-
logical condition is not satisfied. This illustrates how the MMA offers a manner to identify educational analogies.

References
Araya, R., Calfucura, P., Dartnell, P., Jiménez, A., Aguirre, C., Palavicino, M., & Lacourly,
N. (2010). The effect of analogies on learning to solve algebraic equations. Pedagogies:
An International Journal, 5, 216–232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2010.
486160.
Armijo, I., Galaz, H., Edwards, M., & Pardo, M. (2016). Informe finalEstudio de
Profundización de Características Psicométricas del TADI. Centro de Investigación
Avanzada en Educación (CIAE) Retrieved from < http://www.ciae.uchile.cl/down-
load.php?file=publicaciones/I-1465419801.pdf > .
Berteletti, I., Lucangeli, D., Piazza, M., Dehaene, S., & Zorzi, M. (2010). Numerical esti-
mation in preschoolers. Developmental Psychology, 46(2), 545–551. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1037/a0017887.
Bloom, B. S. (1985). Generalizations about talent development. Developing Talent in Young
People, 507–549.
Booth, J. L., & Newton, K. J. (2012). Fractions: Could they really be the gatekeeper’s
doorman? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37(4), 247–253. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.07.001.
Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2002). Model selection and multimodel inference: A
practical information-theoretic approach (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.
Carbonneau, K. J., Marley, S. C., & Selig, J. P. (2013). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of
teaching mathematics with concrete manipulatives. Journal of Educational Psychology,
105(2), 380–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0031084.
Carey, Susan (2009). The origin of concepts. Journal of Cognition and Development.
Dayton, C. M. (2003). Model comparisons using information measures. Journal of Modern
Applied Statistical Methods, 2(2), 2.
Dehaene, S. (1997). Number sense. Oxford University Press64–88.
Dehaene, S., & Brannon, E. (2011). Space, time and number in the brain: searching for the
foundations of mathematical thought. Academic Press.
Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and
number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(3), 371–396.
Edwards, M., & Pardo, M. (2013). TADI: Test de aprendizaje y desarrollo infantil.
Universidad de Chile Retrieved from < http://books.google.cl/
books?id=fUxQnwEACAAJ > .
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social
cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 255–278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/
annurev.psych.59.103006.093629.
Fisher, K., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., Singer, D. G., & Berk, L. (2011). Playing
around in school: Implications for learning and educational policy. The Oxford
Handbook of the Development of Play, 341–362.
Gelman, R., & Gallistel, C. R. (1978). The child’s understanding of number/Rochel Gelman
and C.R. Gallistel. Mass: Harvard University Press Cambridge.
Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive
Science, 7(2), 155–170.
Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2003). Learning and transfer: A general
role for analogical encoding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 393–408.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.393.
Goldstone, R. L., Landy, D. H., & Son, J. Y. (2010). The education of perception. Topics in
Cognitive Science, 2(2), 265–284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.
01055.x.
Halford, G. S., Wilson, W. H., & Phillips, S. (2010). Relational knowledge: The foundation
of higher cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(11), 497–505. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.tics.2010.08.005.
Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., Berk, L. E., & Singer, D. (2008). A mandate for playful
learning in preschool: Applying the scientific evidence. Oxford University Press.
Holyoak, K. J. (2012). Analogy and relational reasoning. The Oxford Handbook of Thinking
and Reasoning, 234–259.
Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P. (1989). Analogical mapping by constraint satisfaction.
Cognitive Science, 13(3), 295–355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(89)
90016-5.
Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adoles-
cence: An essay on the construction of formal operational structures (developmental psy-
chology). Basic Books.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during in-
struction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, pro-
blem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2),
75–86.
Kolodner, J. L. (2002). Analogical and case-based reasoning: Their implications for
education. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 123–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1207/S15327809JLS1101_5.
Kurtz, K. J., Miao, C.-H., & Gentner, D. (2001). Learning by analogical bootstrapping. The
Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(4), 417–446.
Landy, D., & Goldstone, R. L. (2007). How abstract is symbolic thought? Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33(4), 720–733. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.720.
Le Corre, M., & Carey, S. (2007). One, two, three, four, nothing more: An investigation of
the conceptual sources of the verbal counting principles. Cognition, 44.
Lerkkanen, M.-K., Kiuru, N., Pakarinen, E., Viljaranta, J., Poikkeus, A.-M., Rasku-
Puttonen, H., ... Nurmi, J.-E. (2012). The role of teaching practices in the develop-
ment of children’s interest in reading and mathematics in kindergarten. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 37(4), 266–279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.
03.004.
Lourenco, S. F., & Longo, M. R. (2010). General magnitude representation in human in-
fants. Psychological Science, 21(6), 873–881. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
0956797610370158.
Markman, A. B., & Dietrich, E. (2000). Extending the classical view of representation.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(12), 470–475.
Mayer, R. E. (2003). Learning and instruction. Prentice Hall.
Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning?

123
J.A. Navarrete et al.
American Psychologist, 59(1), 14.
Miller, E., & Almon, J. (2009). Crisis in the kindergarten: Why children need to play in school.
College Park, MD: Alliance for Childhood.
Navarrete, J. A., & Dartnell, P. (2017). Towards a category theory approach to analogy:
Analyzing re-representation and acquisition of numerical knowledge. PLOS
Computational Biology, 13(8), e1005683. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.
1005683.
Newcombe, N. S., Ambady, N., Eccles, J., Gomez, L., Klahr, D., Linn, M., ... Mix, K. (2009).
Psychology’s role in mathematics and science education. American Psychologist, 64(6),
538–550. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014813.
Núñez, R., & Cooperrider, K. (2013). The tangle of space and time in human cognition.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences Retrieved from < http://www.sciencedirect.com/sci-
ence/article/pii/S1364661313000739 > .
Piantadosi, S. T., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Goodman, N. D. (2012). Bootstrapping in a lan-
guage of thought: A formal model of numerical concept learning. Cognition, 123(2),
199–217.
Ramani, G. B., & Siegler, R. S. (2008). Promoting broad and stable improvements in low-
income children’s numerical knowledge through playing number board games. Child
Development, 79(2), 375–394.
Ramani, G. B., Siegler, R. S., & Hitti, A. (2012). Taking it to the classroom: Number board
games as a small group learning activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3),
661–672. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0028995.
Richland, L. E., & McDonough, I. M. (2010). Learning by analogy: Discriminating between
potential analogs. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(1), 28–43. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.09.001.
Richland, L. E., Morrison, R. G., & Holyoak, K. J. (2006). Children’s development of
analogical reasoning: Insights from scene analogy problems. Journal of Experimental
Child Psychology, 94(3), 249–273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2006.02.002.
Richland, L. E., Zur, O., & Holyoak, K. J. (2007). Cognitive supports for analogies in the
mathematics classroom. Science-New York Then Washington, 316(5828), 1128.
Richland, L. E., Stigler, J. W., & Holyoak, K. J. (2012). Teaching the conceptual structure
of mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 47(3), 189–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1080/00461520.2012.667065.
Saxe, G. B., Taylor, E. V., McIntosh, C., & Gearhart, M. (2005). Representing fractions
124
Contemporary Educational Psychology 54 (2018) 112–124
with standard notation: A developmental analysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics
Education, 137–157.
Saxe, G. B., Shaughnessy, M. M., Shannon, A., Langer-Osuna, J. M., Chinn, R., & Gearhart,
M. (2007). Learning about fractions as points on a number line. The Learning of
Mathematics: Sixty-Ninth Yearbook, 221–237.
Siegler, R., & Booth, J. (2008). Numerical magnitude representations influence arithmetic
learning. Child Development, 79(4), 1016–1031.
Siegler, R. S., & Ramani, G. B. (2008). Playing linear numerical board games promotes
low-income children’s numerical development. Developmental Science, 11(5),
655–661.
Siegler, R. S., & Ramani, G. B. (2009). Playing linear number board games—But not
circular ones—Improves low-income preschoolers’ numerical understanding. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 545.
Singer, E. (2013). Play and playfulness, basic features of early childhood education.
European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 21(2), 172–184. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1080/1350293X.2013.789198.
Singer, E. (2015). Play and playfulness in early childhood education and care. Psychology
in Russia, 8(2), 27.
Van der Aalsvoort, G., & Broadhead, P. (2009). Play and learning in educational settings.
Educational & Child Psychology, 26.
Viadero, D. (2007). Teachers say NCLB has changed classroom practice. Education Week,
6–22.
Vitale, J. M., Black, J. B., & Swart, M. I. (2014). Applying grounded coordination chal-
lenges to concrete learning materials: A study of number line estimation. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 106(2), 403–418. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0034098.
Whitehurst, G. J., Arnold, D. S., Epstein, J. N., Angell, A. L., Smith, M., & Fischel, J. E.
(1994). A picture book reading intervention in day care and home for children from
low-income families. Developmental Psychology, 30(5), 679.
Wilson, A. J., Revkin, S. K., Cohen, D., Cohen, L., & Dehaene, S. (2006). An open trial
assessment of “The Number Race”, an adaptive computer game for remediation of
dyscalculia. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 2(1), 1.
Wilson, A. J., Dehaene, S., Dubois, O., & Fayol, M. (2009). Effects of an adaptive game
intervention on accessing number sense in low-socioeconomic-status kindergarten
children. Mind, Brain, and Education, 3(4), 224–234.