Dyscalculia

Question 1

Define Dyscalculia

Answer 1

It is a specific learning disorder which is diagnosed according to the DSM5 as “mathematical ability is below that expected given a persons chronological age, measured intelligence and age-appropriate education”

Question 2

How many people worldwide are thought to have Dyscalculia?

Answer 2

3-6% though it has not been studied often (Shalev et al., 2000)

Question 3

What are the two main types of Dyscalculia

Answer 3

Type one: primary heterogenus disorder thought to be caused by individual deficits in numerical arithmetic functioning at behavioral, cognitive and neuronal levels.
Secondary: math deficits caused by non-numerical impairments such as attention disorders

Question 4

what are the preschool symptoms

Answer 4

Difficulties counting to ten
difficulties with quantities if numbers
difficulties recognising small numbers of objects

Question 5

what are the later symptoms

Answer 5

impaired arithmetic fact retrieval (does not get easier to retrieve)
impaired basic number processing
non numerical deficits in working memory and EF tasks
vision spatial attention impairments

Question 6

what are some of the steps in diagnosis dyscalculia

Answer 6

Firstly, must go through the mathematical components including personal, familial and scholastic developmental history.
Ask whether other family members have these difficulties
trying to distinguish between primary and secondary

Question 7

What have concordance rate studies said about dyscalculia

Answer 7

Concordance rates that run along different pairs of family members and found large evidence for it running in families (Shalev et al, 2001)

Question 8

have candice genes been idenfiied?

Answer 8

Caravalho (2019) identified candice genes through reviewing the genetic foundations however non have been confirmed in independent studies.

Question 9

Has a neural basis for dyscalculia been identified?

Answer 9

Price and Ansari (2013) found evidence. They revieled the Intraparietal Sulcus (IPS) as a key region involved as a key region in processing numerical magnitude.
Studies have found reduced modulation of this in Dyscalculia.
Compensatory mechanisms have been shown to contribute and have been able to induce structural and functional changes

Question 10

What are environmental factors that could contribute

Answer 10

nature and extent of schooling
characteristics of the counting system
pre/ post natal illness
socio-economic adversity

Question 11

What are there high levels of comobidity with

Answer 11

learning disorders such as dyslexia
other vairious neuropsychiatric and pediatric disorders such as ADHD and epilepsy

Question 12

Outline the domain specific impairments in numebr sense theory of Dyscalculia

Answer 12

The theory explains dyscalculic individuals have specific impairments in their number sense and in tasks such as impaired magnitude numbers and altered numerical distance effects (Price et al , 2007)

Question 13

Explain number sense

Answer 13

Intuitive understanding of numbers including understanding their relationship and mangnitude and having a mature mental numberline (Von Aster & Shalev, 2007)

Question 14

What have brain imaging studies shown about number sense

Answer 14

butterworth (2005) found this specific deficit is linked to neurifunctional peculiarities in the interparietal suclus, one of the key mathematical number processing areas of the brain

Individual differences reflect varaions in neural pathways. Functional activation during magnitude comparison studies reflect developmental variations overtime (Kaufmann et al., 2011)

Question 15

what are some supporting points for the specific deficits in number processing theory

Answer 15

• empirical evidence from Lnderl et al (2004)
• Menon et al (2003) study
• numerical deficits could cause domain general effects

Question 16

Explain the theory that numerical deficits cause domain general effects as support for domain specific

Answer 16

numerical deficits may manifest as domain general effects in for instance working memory when diagnostic tools draw on numerical stimuli (Kauffmann et al., 2013)

As numbers are so fundamental it affects other areas

Question 17

Explain Landerl et al (2004) to support

Answer 17

Studied 72 dyscalculic children and 72 low achieving matched for IQ.
Tested on a battery of numerical ability tests
Dyscalculia group performed significantly worse than controls (longer more errors)
showing specific number deficits as they were IQ matched so it must be caused by maths deficits.
Also shows a difference between dyscalculia and low achievement in maths.

Question 18

Explain Menon et al (2003) study to support domain specific theory

Answer 18

20 dyscalculic children and 20 typically developing controlled for age, IQ and gender
underwent fMRI and DTI (diffusion tensor imaging).
dyscalculia showed reduced activity in the left inferior parietal lobe (involved in number processing).
DTI showed reduced white matter in connectivity between areas making it difficult to access and use information to perform tasks.
showing specific defitict in specific brain region

Question 19

What are the citisisms for domain specific theory

Answer 19

• does not explain the large amount of variation in individuals with the condition
• too simplistic
• research uses small group sizes
• Mammarella et al (2021) no evidence for a core deficit.

Question 20

Explain the criticism that there is a large amount of variation for domain specific

Answer 20

Heterogeneous cinical picture does not agree with the single core deific assumption and suggests subtypes can be distinguished on the basis of domain general effects.
It doesn’t explain why there is a large amount of variation in the areas of maths people struggle with.

Question 21

Explain the criticism that domain specific theory is too simplistic

Answer 21

it does not take into account environmental factors which have been shown to have an effect on the development of dyscalculia

Question 22

Explain the criticism of the resrch of domain specific theory

Answer 22

a lot of research has used very small group sizes and does not have a set standardised testing or cut off points. there is a lot of variation in the results, which can limit the validity and generalizability outside the realm of research.

Question 23

Explain Mammarella et al (2021) study which criticises domain specific theory of dyscalculia

Answer 23

Studied over a 1000 children with dyscalculia against over 1000 controls.
on basic number processing and domain general constructs
REsults showed differences btwen the two groups could be assumed among general characteristics of the population rather than a core deficit in one cognitive ability.
Dyscalculia is complex caused by range of different cognitive abilities.

Question 24

Define / explain the domain general theory of dyscalculia

Answer 24

Subtypes can be explained on a basis of associated domain general deficits
deficits could be non mathematical in origin:
- Working memory
- Semantic memory
- Visuo-spatial skills
And these processes may play a role in many other areas of learning and problem solving.
(Geary, 2004)

Question 25

Give 2 examples of how other deficits may cause dyscalculia

Answer 25

WM is responsible for manipulating information while holding it in the mind - an important maths skill
Attention is needed to pay attention to a task
Visuospatial skills are needed o understand arrangements of numbers on a number line

Question 26

Does domain general theory exclude the idea of a specific deficit

Answer 26

It does not, it emphasises the role of broader deficits across a range of cognitive processes. They are not mutually exclusive.

Question 27

Explain Van Luit and Toll (2018) study on dyscalculia being domain specific and domain general

Answer 27

Tested dyscalculic children across a range of tasks (planning, naming speed, STM, WM and attention)
The findings showed a lot of variabilities in each of the measures so its hard to say if it is domain specific or domain general. THere is a lot of vairabity and heterogeneity.

Question 28

Explain Agonstini et al (2022) study explaining variation in dyscalculia

Answer 28

Reveded literature of omain general ongative skills looking at processing speed, WM, attention, STM visuospatial and verbal.
17/22 found deficits in processing speed and 9/12 found deficits in verbal STM
Shows it is a very complex process that is unclear across a range of studies, there is also no specific standards for testing

Question 29

What are the supporting points for domain general theory?

Answer 29

• early deficits may cause later specific deficits
• High co morbidity
• Morsanyi et al (2018) study

Question 30

Explain why the fact that early deficits causing specific deficits supports domain general theory?

Answer 30

Early domain general deficits may result in seemingly domain specific deficits in development. because the earlier deficits may be more relevant to the computational demands of one domain (e.g. number) while still affecting other domains in a more subtle way (providing comprehensive explanation) (Kaufmann et al., 2013)

Question 31

Explain why high comorbidity provides support for domain general theory

Answer 31

Other learning disorders such as Dyslexia and ADHD further support this notion of shared underlying cognitive deficits as they would have a shared cause therefore it provides a comprehensive explanation

Question 32

Explain Morsanyi et al (2018) study to support domain general deficits

Answer 32

40 Dyscalculic 40 TD
battery of tasks on order processing (WM)
Assessed ability to order numbers and then annual events (e.g. holidays)
For both number and non number conditions dyscalculic individuals were worex at tasks for working memory .

Question 33

What are some criticisms of domain general theory

Answer 33

• numerical deficits may manifest as general deficits due to diagnostic tools drawing on numerical stimuli (Kaufman et al 2013)
• Wang et al (2012) study
• (as before) landerl et al study

Question 34

Explain Wang et al (2012) study against domain general deficits

Answer 34

examined inhibition in dyscalculia, dyslexia and controls
Some tasks involved numbers some did not (number, word, graph)
Dyscalculia performed differently to TD and Dyslexic only in the number task giving evidence for specific deficit

Question 35

Explain why Landerl et al (2004) is a criticism for domain general theory

Answer 35

Its results show support for deficits specifically in basic numerical abilities when matche for IQ specifically. showing these are likely to the cause of difficulty

Question 36

what are some of the interventions for dyacalculia

Answer 36

Kadosh et al (2013) outlined a few:
- Catch up numeracy
- computer based interventions
- transcranial direct stimulation

Question 37

Explain why catch-up numeracy is important?

Answer 37

Dowker (2005)
- 395 children
- received 30 mins of individualised attention per day
- improved twice as much as what was expected from passage of time based on control (non intervention)
Shows targeted intervention based on cognitive and neuroscientific principles works.

Question 38

How are computer-based interventions helpful

Answer 38

Kucian et al (2011)
- 16 children, 16 controls
- 5 week computer based intervention
- Children with and without showed improved spatial representations and number abilities
- fMRIs showed functional changes due to more brain activation.

Question 39

Explain Transcranial direct stimulation

Answer 39

deliviers electrical curents to the scalp via electrodes to alter neural activity
Results have shown ability to treat attention, WM, numeracy language and EF to have long lasting behavioural effects (Butterworth 2010)