Because it's there! Why some children count, rather than infer numerical relationships

Kevin Muldoon, Charlie Lewis, John Towse

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    6 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Two experiments are described that investigate the ability to infer the number of items in one-to-one corresponding sets for two age groups. We assess the influence of set size, the visibility of sets, and the way in which set equivalence is derived - pairing versus sharing - using a repeated-measures design. Three-year-olds are largely restricted to inferring number after separating out conceptually paired items. In contrast, four-year-olds are able to make appropriate inferences about shared items, but they typically prefer to count those items if they are visible. Moreover, the size of corresponding sets affects children's propensity to count rather than infer. Children count more often on larger sets. The ability to infer number using cardinal extension is associated most strongly with sharing proficiency, although counting skills also play an important part. We discuss how the data reveal an emerging understanding of the relationship between one-to-one correspondence and cardinality. © 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)472-491
    Number of pages20
    JournalCognitive Development
    Volume20
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Jul 2005

    Keywords

    • Counting
    • Numerical equivalence
    • One-to-one correspondence
    • Sharing

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Because it's there! Why some children count, rather than infer numerical relationships'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this