The authors examined whether math fluency was independent from untimed math and from reading using 314 pairs of school-aged twins drawn from the Western Reserve Reading and Math Projects. Twins were assessed through a 90-min home visit at approximately age 10 and were reassessed in their homes approximately 1 year later. Results suggested that the shared environment and genetics influenced the covariance among math fluency, untimed math measures, and reading measures. However, roughly two thirds of the variance in math fluency was independent from untimed math measures and reading, including reading fluency. The majority of this independent variance was the result of genetic factors that were longitudinally stable across two measurement occasions. These results suggest that math fluency, although related to other math measures, may also be a genetically distinct dimension of mathematics performance.
AunolaK.LeskinenE.LerkkanenM.-K.NurmiJ.-E. (2004). Developmental dynamics of math performance from preschool to grade 2. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 699–713.
2.
BullR.JohnstonR. S. (1997). Children’s arithmetical difficulties: Contributions from processing speed, item identification, and short term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 1-24.
3.
BullR.JohnstonR. S.RoyJ. A. (1999). Exploring the roles of the visual-spatial sketch pad and central executive in children’s arithmetical skills: Views from cognition and developmental neuropsychology. Developmental Neuropsychology, 15, 421–442.
4.
ButterworthB. (1999). The mathematical brain. London, UK: Macmillan.
5.
DiPernaJ. C.LeiP.-W.ReidE. E. (2007). Kindergarten predictors of mathematical growth in the primary grades: An investigation using the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study–Kindergarten cohort. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 369–379.
6.
FletcherJ. M.VaughnS. (2009). Response to intervention: Preventing and remediating academic difficulties. Child Development, 3, 30–37.
7.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.StuebingK.FletcherJ. M.HamlettC. L.LambertW. (2008). Problem solving and computational skill: Are they shared or distinct aspects of mathematical cognition?Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 30–47.
8.
FuchsL. S.PowellS. R.SeethalerP. M.FuchsD.HamlettC. L.CirinoP. T.FletcherJ. M. (2010). A framework for remediating the number combination deficits of students with mathematics difficulty. Exceptional Children, 76, 135–156.
9.
GearyD. C. (2010). Mathematical disabilities: Reflections on cognitive, neuropsychological, and genetic components. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 130–133.
10.
GearyD. C.Burlingham-DubreeM. (1989). External validation of the strategy choice model for addition. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 47, 175–192.
11.
GearyD. C.WidamanK. F. (1987). Individual differences in cognitive arithmetic. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 154–171.
12.
GearyD. C.WidamanK. F. (1992). Numerical cognition: On the convergence of componential and psychometric models. Intelligence, 16, 47–80.
13.
GoldsmithH. H. (1991). A zygosity questionnaire for young twins: A research note. Behavior Genetics, 21, 257–269.
14.
HartS. A.PetrillS. A.ThompsonL. A. (2010). A factorial analysis of timed and untimed measures of mathematics and reading abilities in school aged twins. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 63–69.
15.
HartS. A.PetrillS. A.ThompsonL. A.PlominR. (2009). The ABCs of math: A genetic analysis of mathematics and its links with reading ability and general cognitive ability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 388–402.
16.
HechtS. A.TorgesenJ. K.WagnerR. K.RashotteC. A. (2001). The relations between phonological processing abilities and emerging individual differences in mathematical computational skills: A longitudinal study from second to fifth grades. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 79, 192–227.
17.
JordanN. C.HanichL. B. (2003). Characteristics of children with moderate mathematics deficiencies: A longitudinal perspective. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 213–221.
18.
KovasY.HaworthC. M. A.DaleP. S.PlominR. (2007). The genetic and environmental origins of learning abilities and disabilities in the early school years. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 72, 1–144.
19.
LanderlK.BevanA.ButterworthB. (2004). Developmental dyscalculia and basic numerical capacities: A study of 8–9-year-old students. Cognition, 93, 99–125.
MazzoccoM. M. M.DevlinK. T.McKenneyS. J. (2008). Is it a fact? Timed arithmetic performance of children with mathematical learning disabilities (MLD) varies as a function of how MLD is defined. Developmental Neuropsychology, 33, 318–344.
22.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: Author.
23.
NealeM. C.BokerS. M.XieG.MaesH. H. (2006). Mx: Statistical modeling (7th ed.). Richmond: Virginia Commonwealth University, Department of Psychiatry.
24.
NealeM. C.CardonL. R. (1992). Methodology for genetic studies of twins and families. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
25.
PetrillS. A.Deater-DeckardK.ThompsonL. A.DeThorneL. S.SchatschneiderC. (2006). Reading skills in early readers: Genetic and shared environmental influences. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 48–55.
26.
PetrillS. A.PlominR. (2007). Quantitative genetics and mathematical abilities/disabilities. In BerchD. B.MazzoccoM. M. M. (Eds.), Why is math so hard for some children? The nature and origins of mathematical learning difficulties and disabilities (pp. 307–322). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
27.
PlominR.DeFriesJ. C.McClearnG. E.McGuffinP. (2008). Behavioral genetics (5th ed.). New York, NY: Worth.
28.
RaghubarK. P.BarnesM. A.HechtS. A. (2010). Working memory and mathematics: A review of developmental, individual difference, and cognitive approaches. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 110–122.
29.
SchwarzG. E. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, 6, 461–464.
30.
SieglerR. S. (1988). Individual differences in strategy choices: Good students, not-so-good students, and perfectionists. Child Development, 59, 833–851.
31.
TolarT. D.LederbergA.FletcherJ. (2009). A structural model of algebra achievement: Computational fluency and spatial visualisation as mediators of the effect of working memory on algebra achievement. Educational Psychology, 29, 239–266.
32.
WagnerR. K.TorgesenJ. K.RashotteC. A. (1999). Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
33.
WilkinsonG. S. (1993). Wide Range Achievement Test–3. Wilmington, DE: Wide Range.
34.
WoodcockR. W. (1987). Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests–Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
35.
WoodcockR. W.McGrawK. S.MatherN. (2001, 2007). Woodcock–Johnson III Tests of Achievement. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside.
