Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 739–753 | Cite as

“Compacted” procedures for adults’ simple addition: A review and critique of the evidence

Brief Report
  • 123 Downloads

Abstract

We review recent empirical findings and arguments proffered as evidence that educated adults solve elementary addition problems (3 + 2, 4 + 1) using so-called compacted procedures (e.g., unconscious, automatic counting); a conclusion that could have significant pedagogical implications. We begin with the large-sample experiment reported by Uittenhove, Thevenot and Barrouillet (2016, Cognition, 146, 289–303), which tested 90 adults on the 81 single-digit addition problems from 1 + 1 to 9 + 9. They identified the 12 very-small addition problems with different operands both ≤ 4 (e.g., 4 + 3) as a distinct subgroup of problems solved by unconscious, automatic counting: These items yielded a near-perfectly linear increase in answer response time (RT) yoked to the sum of the operands. Using the data reported in the article, however, we show that there are clear violations of the sum-counting model’s predictions among the very-small addition problems, and that there is no real RT boundary associated with addends ≤4. Furthermore, we show that a well-known associative retrieval model of addition facts—the network interference theory (Campbell, 1995)—predicts the results observed for these problems with high precision. We also review the other types of evidence adduced for the compacted procedure theory of simple addition and conclude that these findings are unconvincing in their own right and only distantly consistent with automatic counting. We conclude that the cumulative evidence for fast compacted procedures for adults’ simple addition does not justify revision of the long-standing assumption that direct memory retrieval is ultimately the most efficient process of simple addition for nonzero problems, let alone sufficient to recommend significant changes to basic addition pedagogy.

Keywords

Addition Procedures Counting Retrieval interference 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada to Jamie Campbell.

References

  1. Aiken, L. R., & Williams, E. N. (1973). Response times in adding and multiplying single-digit numbers. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 37, 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashcraft, M. H., & Guillaume, M. M. (2009). Mathematical cognition and the problem size effect. In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 51, pp. 121–151). Burlington: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bajic, D., & Rickard, T. C. (2009). The temporal dynamics of strategy execution in cognitive skill learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 113–121.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Baroody, A. J., Eiland, M. D., Purpura, D. J., & Reid, E. E. (2014). Fostering first graders’ fluency with basic subtraction and larger addition combinations via computer assisted instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 32, 159–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baroody, A. J., Purpura, D. J., Eiland, M. D., & Reid, E. E. (2015). The impact of highly and minimally guided discovery instruction on promoting the learning of reasoning strategies for basic add-1 and doubles combinations. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 30, 93–105. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.09.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barrouillet, P., Benardin, S., & Camos, V. (2004). Time constraints and resource sharing in adults’ working memory span. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 83–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barrouillet, P., & Fayol, M. (1998). From algorithmic computing to direct retrieval: Evidence from number and alphabetic arithmetic in children and adults. Memory & Cognition, 26, 355–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barrouillet, P., Lépine, R., & Camos, V. (2008). Is the influence of working memory capacity on high level cognition mediated by complexity or resource-dependent elementary processes? Psychological Bulletin & Review, 15, 528–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barrouillet, P., & Thevenot, C. (2013). On the problem-size effect in small additions: Can we really discard any counting-based account? Cognition, 128, 35–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Butterworth, B., Zorzi, M., Girelli, L., & Jonckheere, A. R. (2001). Storage and retrieval of addition facts: The role of number comparison. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 1005–1029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Campbell, J. I. D. (1987). Network interference and mental multiplication. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 109–123.Google Scholar
  12. Campbell, J. I. D. (1995). Mechanisms of simple addition and multiplication: A modified network-interference theory and simulation. Mathematical Cognition, 1, 121–164.Google Scholar
  13. Campbell, J. I. D. (1999). Division by multiplication. Memory & Cognition, 27, 245–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Campbell, J. I. D. (2008). Subtraction by addition. Memory & Cognition, 36, 1094–1102. doi: 10.3758/MC.36.6.1094 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Campbell, J. I. D., & Agnew, H. (2009). Retrieval savings with non-identical elements: The case of simple addition and subtraction. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 934–944. doi: 10.3758/PBR.16.5.938 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Campbell, J. I. D., & Alberts, N. M. (2009). Operation-specific effects of numerical surface form on arithmetic strategy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(4), 999–1011.Google Scholar
  17. Campbell, J. I. D., & Alberts, N. M. (2010). Inverse reference in adults’ elementary arithmetic. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 77–85. doi: 10.1037/a0015720
  18. Campbell, J. I. D., & Beech, L. C. (2014). No generalization of practice for non-zero simple addition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 1766–1771. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000003 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Campbell, J. I. D., Chen, Y., Allen, K., & Beech, L. (2016). Transfer of training in alphabet arithmetic. Memory & Cognition. doi: 10.3758/s13421-016-0631-x Google Scholar
  20. Campbell, J. I. D., Chen, Y., & Maslany, A. J. (2013). Retrieval-induced forgetting of arithmetic facts across cultures. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25, 759–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Campbell, J. I. D., Dufour, K. D., & Chen, Y. (2015). Retrieval-induced forgetting of multiplication facts and identity rule. Memory & Cognition, 43, 672–680. doi: 10.3758/s13421-014-0483-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Campbell, J. I. D., Fuchs-Lacelle, S., & Phenix, T. L. (2006). Identical elements model of arithmetic memory: Extension to addition and subtraction. Memory & Cognition, 34, 633–647. doi: 10.3758/BF03193585 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Campbell, J. I. D., & Oliphant, M. (1992). Representation and retrieval of arithmetic facts: A network-interference theory and simulation. In J. I. D. Campbell (Ed.), The nature and origins of mathematical skills (pp. 331–364). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Campbell, J. I. D., & Robert, N. D. (2008). Bidirectional associations in multiplication memory: Conditions of negative and positive transfer. Journal of Experiment Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 546–555. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.3.546 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Campbell, J. I. D., & Therriault, N. H. (2013). Retrieval-induced forgetting of arithmetic facts but not rules. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25, 717–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Campbell, J. I. D., & Thompson, V. A. T. (2012). Retrieval-induced forgetting of arithmetic facts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 118–129. doi: 10.1037/a0025056 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Campbell, J. I. D., & Timm, J. C. (2000). Adults’ strategy choices for simple addition: Effects of retrieval interference. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 692–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Campbell, J. I. D., & Xue, Q. (2001). Cognitive arithmetic across cultures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 299–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Chen, Y., & Campbell, J. I. D. (2014). Generalization effects in Canadian and Chinese adults’ simple addition. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 152–157.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Chen, Y., & Campbell, J. I. D. (2015). Operator and operand preview effects in simple addition and multiplication: A comparison of Canadian and Chinese adults. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27, 326–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Chen, Y., & Campbell, J. I. D. (2016). Operator priming and generalization of practice in adults’ simple arithmetic. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42, 627–635. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000196 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Chen, Y., & Campbell, J. I. D. (2017). Transfer of training in simple addition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2017.1318295
  33. Chen, Y., & Campbell, J. I. D. (in press). An evaluation of sex and cultural differences in arithmetic retrieval-induced forgetting. Journal of Cognitive Psychology.Google Scholar
  34. Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87–185.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. De Visscher, A., & Noël, M.-P. (2013). A case study of arithmetic facts dyscalculia caused by a hypersensitivity-to-interference in memory. Cortex, 49, 50–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. De Visscher, A., & Noël, M.-P. (2014a). Arithmetic facts storage deficit: The hypersensitivity-to-interference in memory hypothesis. Developmental Science, 17, 434–442.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. De Visscher, A., & Noël, M.-P. (2014b). The detrimental effect of interference in multiplication facts storing: Typical development and individual differences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 2380–2400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. De Visscher, A., Noël, M. P., & De Smedt, B. (2016). The role of physical digit representation and numerical magnitude representation in children’s multiplication fact retrieval. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 152, 41–53. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2016.06.014 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Dehaene, S. (1989). The psychophysics of numerical comparison: A reexamination of apparently incompatible data. Perception and Cognition, 45, 557–566.Google Scholar
  40. Dehaene, S., Dupoux, E., & Mehler, J. (1990). Is numerical comparison digital? Analogical and symbolic effects in two-digit number comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 626–641.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Fayol, M., & Thevenot, C. (2012). The use of procedural knowledge in simple addition and subtraction problems. Cognition, 123, 392–403.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Galfano, G., Rusconi, E., & Umiltà, C. (2003). Automatic activation of multiplication facts: Evidence from the nodes adjacent to the product. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 31–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Geary, D. C., Bow-Thomas, C. C., Liu, F., & Siegler, R. S. (1996). Development of arithmetical competencies in Chinese and American children: Influence of age, language, and schooling. Child Development, 67, 2022–2044.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Geary, D. C., Bow-Thomas, C. C., & Yao, Y. (1992). Counting knowledge and skill in cognitive addition: A comparison of normal and mathematically disabled children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 54, 372–391.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Geary, D. C., Hoard, M. K., Byrd-Craven, J., & DeSoto, M. C. (2004). Strategy choices in simple and complex addition: Contributions of working memory and counting knowledge for children with mathematical disability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 88, 121–151.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Griffiths, T. L., & Kalish, M. K. (2002). A multidimensional scaling approach to mental multiplication. Memory & Cognition, 30, 97–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hubber, P., Gilmore, C., & Cragg, L. (2014). The roles of the central executive and visuospatial storage in mental arithmetic: A comparison across strategies. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 936–954. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2013.838590 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Imbo, I., & Vandierendonck, A. (2007). The role of phonological and executive working memory resources in simple arithmetic strategies. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 910–933. doi: 10.1080/09541440601051571 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Imbo, I., & Vandierendonck, A. (2008). Practice effects on strategy selection and strategy efficiency in simple mental arithmetic. Psychological Research, 72, 528–541. doi: 10.1007/s00426-007-0128-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Jones, R. M., & Van Lehn, K. (1994). Acquisition of children's addition strategies: A model of impasse-free, knowledge-level learning. Machine Learning, 16, 11–36. doi: 10.1023/A:1022626701243 Google Scholar
  51. Kole, J. A., & Healy, A. F. (2013). Is retrieval mediated after repeated testing? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 462–472.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. LeFevre, J., & Liu, J. (1997). The role of experience in numerical skill: Multiplication performance in adults from Canada and China. Mathematical Cognition, 3, 31–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. LeFevre, J. A., Sadesky, G. S., & Bisanz, J. (1996). Selection of procedures in mental addition: Reassessing the problem-size effect in adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 216–223.Google Scholar
  54. Mandler, G., & Shebo, B. J. (1982). Subitizing: An analysis of its component processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Masson, N., & Pesenti, M. (2014). Attentional bias induced by solving simple and complex addition and subtraction problems. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(8), 1514–1526.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Masson, N., Pesenti, M., & Dormal, V. (2016). Impact of optokinetic stimulation on mental arithmetic. Psychological Research, 80(4). Advance online publication. doi: 10.1007/s00426-016-0784-z
  57. Mathieu, R., Gourjon, A., Couderc, A., Thevenot, C., & Prado, J. (2016). Running the number line: Rapid shifts of attention in single-digit arithmetic. Cognition, 146, 229–239.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Mauro, D. G., LeFevre, J., & Morris, J. (2003). Effects of problem format on division and multiplication performance: Division facts are mediated via multiplication-based representations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 163–170.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Moyer, R. S., & Landauer, T. K. (1967). Time required for judgments of numerical inequality. Nature, 215, 1519–1520.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Phenix, T. L., & Campbell, J. I. D. (2004). Effects of multiplication practice on product verification: Integrated structures model or retrieval induced forgetting? Memory & Cognition, 32, 324–335. doi: 10.3758/BF03196862 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rickard, T. C. (2005). A revised identical elements model of arithmetic fact representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 250–257. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.31.2.250 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Rickard, T. C., & Bourne, L. E., Jr. (1996). Some tests of an identical elements model of basic arithmetic skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1281–1295.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Rickard, T. C., Lau, J. S., & Pashler, H. (2008). Spacing and the transition from calculation to retrieval. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 656–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Robert, N. D., & Campbell, J. I. D. (2008). Simple addition and multiplication: No comparison. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 20, 123–138. doi: 10.1080/09541440701275823 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Roussel, J. L., Fayol, M., & Barrouillet, P. (2002). Procedural vs. direct retrieval strategies in arithmetic: A comparison between additive and multiplicative problem solving. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14, 61–104. doi: 10.1080/09541440042000115 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Shrager, J., & Siegler, R. S. (1998). SCADS: A model of children’s strategy choices and strategy discoveries. Psychological Science, 9, 405–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Siegler, R. S. (1987). The perils of averaging data over strategies: An example from children’s addition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 250–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Siegler, R. S., & Jenkins, E. A. (1989). How children discover new strategies. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  69. Siegler, R. S., & Shipley, C. (1995). Variation, selection, and cognitive change. In T. Simon & G. Halford (Eds.), Developing cognitive competence: New approaches to process modeling (pp. 31–76). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  70. Siegler, R. S., & Shrager, J. (1984). Strategy choice addition and subtraction: How do children know what to do? In C. Sophian (Ed.), Origins of cognitive skills (pp. 229–293). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  71. Singley, M. K., & Anderson, J. R. (1989). The transfer of cognitive skill. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Sohn, M.-H., & Carlson, R. A. (1998). Procedural frameworks for simple procedural skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1052–1067.Google Scholar
  73. Storm, B., & Levy, B. (2012). A progress report on the inhibition account of retrieval-induced forgetting. Memory & Cognition, 40, 827–843. doi: 10.3758/s13421-012-0211-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Svenson, O. (1985). Memory retrieval of answers of simple additions as reflected in response latencies. Acta Psychologica, 59, 285–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Thevenot, C., Barrouillet, P., Castel, C., & Uittenhove, K. (2016). Ten-year-old children strategies in mental addition: A counting model account. Cognition, 146, 289–303.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Uittenhove, K., Thevenot, C., & Barrouillet, P. (2016). Fast automated counting procedures in addition problem solving: When are they used and why are they mistaken for retrieval? Cognition, 146, 289–303.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Welford, A. T. (1960). The measurement of sensory-motor performance: Survey and reappraisal of twelve years’ progress. Ergonomics, 3, 189–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Whalen, J. (1997). The influence of semantic magnitude representations on arithmetic: Theory, data, and simulation. Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, USA, 19, 814–819.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada

Personalised recommendations