Eye movements reveal that young school children shift attention when solving additions and subtractions

Spatial coding of arithmetic operations in early learning: an eye tracking study in first-grade elementary school children

A growing body of evidence indicates that mental calculation in adults is accompanied by horizontal attention shifts along a mental continuum representing the range of plausible answers. The fast deployment of spatial attention suggests a predictive role in guiding the search for the answer. The link between arithmetic and spatial functions is theoretically justified by the need to alleviate the cognitive load of mental calculation, but the question of how this link establishes during development gives rise to opposing views emphasizing either biological or cultural factors. The role of education, in particular, remains debated in the absence of data covering the period when children learn arithmetic. In this study, we measured gaze movements, as a proxy for attentional shifts, while first-grade elementary school children solved single-digit additions and subtractions. The investigation was scheduled only a few weeks after the formal teaching of symbolic subtraction to assess the role of spatial attention in early learning. Gaze patterns revealed horizontal- but not vertical- attentional shifts, with addition shifting the gaze more rightward than subtraction. The shift was observed as soon as the first operand and the operator were presented, corroborating the view that attention is used to predictively identify the portion of the numerical continuum where the answer is likely to be located, as adult studies suggested. The finding of a similar gaze pattern in adults and six-year-old children who have just learned how to subtract single digits challenges the idea that arithmetic problem solving requires intensive practice to be linked to spatial attention.

Anchoring bias in mental arithmetic

Mental arithmetic is widely studied, both with symbolic digits and with non-symbolic dot patterns that require operand estimation. Several studies reported surprising biases in adults' performance with both formats while their direction (over/underestimation in addition/subtraction) remains controversial (operational momentum effect or OM; Prado & Knops, Prado and Knops, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, in Press., 2024). Theoretical accounts of OM make opposing predictions, thus enabling a decisive test: Using symbolic stimuli and responses, we enabled accurate operand encoding and result reporting, thus leaving mental calculation as only source of bias. Importantly, we manipulated operand order through calculation instructions (e.g., "29 + 19" vs. "add 19 to 29") to assess the crucial role of first operand size as cognitive anchor. With both auditory (Experiment 1, N = 30) and visual presentation (Experiment 2, N = 30), we observed reverse OM, i.e., overestimations in subtraction and underestimations in addition. Importantly, this instance of operation-based anchoring was independent of a second anchoring effect related to operand order: A large operand is a stronger anchor when mentioned first. Our discovery of both operation-based and order-based anchoring extends the well-known anchoring effect into mental arithmetic and eliminates several competing theories about the origin of OM.

Spatial attention in mental arithmetic: A literature review and meta-analysis

We review the evidence for the conceptual association between arithmetic and space and quantify the effect size in meta-analyses. We focus on three effects: (a) the operational momentum effect (OME), which has been defined as participants' tendency to overestimate results of addition problems and underestimate results of subtraction problems; (b) the arithmetic cueing effect, in which arithmetic problems serve as spatial cues in target detection or temporal order judgment tasks; and (c) the associations between arithmetic and space observed with eye- and hand-tracking studies. The OME was consistently found in paradigms that provided the participants with numerical response alternatives. The OME shows a large effect size, driven by an underestimation during subtraction while addition was unbiased. In contrast, paradigms in which participants indicated their estimate by transcoding their final estimate to a spatial reference frame revealed no consistent OME. Arithmetic cueing studies show a reliable small to medium effect size, driven by a rightward bias for addition. Finally, eye- and hand-tracking studies point to replicable associations between arithmetic and eye or hand movements. To account for the complexity of the observed pattern, we introduce the Adaptive Pathways in Mental Arithmetic (APiMA) framework. The model accommodates central notions of numerical and arithmetic processing and helps identifying which pathway a given paradigm operates on. It proposes that the divergence between OME and arithmetic cueing studies comes from the predominant use of non-symbolic versus symbolic stimuli, respectively. Overall, our review and findings clearly support an association between arithmetic and spatial processing.