...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The quarterly journal of experimental psychology: QJEP >Is the SNARC effect related to the level of mathematics? No systematic relationship observed despite more power, more repetitions, and more direct assessment of arithmetic skill
【24h】

Is the SNARC effect related to the level of mathematics? No systematic relationship observed despite more power, more repetitions, and more direct assessment of arithmetic skill

机译：SNARC效应与数学水平有关吗？尽管有更多的能力，更多的重复和更直接的算术技能评估，但没有观察到系统的关系

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The SNARC (spatial-numerical association of response codes) described that larger numbers are responded faster with the right hand and smaller numbers with the left hand. It is held in the literature that arithmetically skilled and nonskilled adults differ in the SNARC. However, the respective data are descriptive, and the decisive tests are nonsignificant. Possible reasons for this nonsignificance could be that in previous studies (a) very small samples were used, (b) there were too few repetitions producing too little power and, consequently, reliabilities that were too small to reach conventional significance levels for the descriptive skill differences in the SNARC, and (c) general mathematical ability was assessed by the field of study of students, while individual arithmetic skills were not examined. Therefore we used a much bigger sample, a lot more repetitions, and direct assessment of arithmetic skills to explore relations between the SNARC effect and arithmetic skills. Nevertheless, a difference in SNARC effect between arithmetically skilled and nonskilled participants was not obtained. Bayesian analysis showed positive evidence of a true null effect, not just a power problem. Hence we conclude that the idea that arithmetically skilled and nonskilled participants generally differ in the SNARC effect is not warranted by our data.
机译：SNARC（响应代码的空间数字关联）描述了较大的数字用右手响应更快，较小的数字用左手响应。据文献记载，SNARC中具有算术技能和非技能的成年人有所不同。但是，各个数据仅是描述性的，而决定性的检验则无意义。这种无意义的可能原因可能是，在以前的研究中（a）使用的样本非常小，（b）重复次数太少，产生的功效太小，因此，可靠性太小，无法达到描述性技能的常规重要性水平SNARC的差异，以及（c）通过学生的学习领域评估了一般的数学能力，而未检查个人的算术技能。因此，我们使用了更大的样本，更多的重复次数以及对算术技能的直接评估来探索SNARC效果与算术技能之间的关系。但是，在算术熟练者和非熟练者之间的SNARC效果上没有区别。贝叶斯分析显示了真正无效效应的积极证据，而不仅仅是功率问题。因此，我们得出的结论是，我们的数据不能保证算术熟练和非熟练参加者通常在SNARC效果方面存在差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号