Miscategorized subset‐knowers: Five‐ and six‐knowers can compare only the numbers they know

Abstract

AbstractInitial acquisition of the first symbolic numbers is measured with the Give a Number (GaN) task. According to the classic method, it is assumed that children who know only 1, 2, 3, or 4 in the GaN task, (termed separately one‐, two‐, three‐, and four‐knowers, or collectively subset‐knowers) have only a limited conceptual understanding of numbers. On the other hand, it is assumed that children who know larger numbers understand the fundamental properties of numbers (termed cardinality‐principle‐knowers), even if they do not know all the numbers as measured with the GaN task, that are in their counting list (e.g., five‐ or six‐knowers). We argue that this practice may not be well‐established. To validate this categorization method, here, the performances of groups with different GaN performances were measured separately in a symbolic comparison task. It was found that similar to one to four‐knowers, five‐, six‐, and so forth, knowers can compare only the numbers that they know in the GaN task. We conclude that five‐, six‐, and so forth, knowers are subset‐knowers because their conceptual understanding of numbers is fundamentally limited. We argue that knowledge of the cardinality principle should be identified with stricter criteria compared to the current practice in the literature.Research Highlights Children who know numbers larger than 4 in the Give a Number (GaN) task are usually assumed to have a fundamental conceptual understanding of numbers. We tested children who know numbers larger than 4 but who do not know all the numbers in their counting list to see whether they compare numbers more similar to children who know only small numbers in the GaN task or to children who have more firm number knowledge. Five‐, six‐, and so forth, knowers can compare only the numbers they know in the GaN task, similar to the performance of the one, two, three, and four‐knowers. We argue that these children have a limited conceptual understanding of numbers and that previous works may have miscategorized them.