Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M. A., Tamim, R., & Zhang, D. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A Stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78, 1102–1134.Google Scholar

Arum, R. (2011). A Lack of Rigor Leaves Students “Adrift” in College. NPR. February 9, 2011. www.npr.org/2011/02/09/133310978/in-college-a-lack-of-rigor-leaves-students-adriftGoogle Scholar

Arum, R. & Roksa, J. (2010). Academically adrift. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Bangert-Drowns, R. L. & Bankert, E. (1990). Meta-analysis of effects of explicit instruction for critical thinking. ERIC, Collection of Educational Resources. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED328614Google Scholar

Butler, H. A. (2012). Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment predicts real-world outcomes of critical thinking. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 721–729. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2851Google Scholar

Butler, H. A., Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J. et al. (2012). Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment and real-world outcomes: Cross-national applications. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 7, 112–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2012.04.001Google Scholar

Butler, H. A., Pentoney, C., & Bong, M. (2017). Predicting real-world outcomes: Critical thinking ability is a better predictor of life decisions than intelligence. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 25, 38–46.Google Scholar

De Bie, H., Wilhelm, P., & Van der Meij, H. (2015). The Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment: Toward a Dutch appraisal of critical thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 17, 33–44.Google Scholar

De Bruin, W. B., Parker, B., & Fischhoff, A. M. (2007). Individual differences in adult decision-making competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(5), 938–956.Google Scholar

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Boston: Heath.Google Scholar

Facione, P., Facione, N., & Giancarlo, C. (2000). The disposition toward critical thinking: Its character, measurement, and relationship to critical thinking skill. Informal Logic, 20(1), 61–84.Google Scholar

Flat Earth Society. (2016). The Flat Earth Society (website). www.theflatearthsociety.org/home/index.phpGoogle Scholar

Forsyth, C .M., Graesser, A. C., Walker, B. et al. (2013). Didactic galactic: Acquiring knowledge learned in a serious game. In Lane, H. C., Yacef, K., Mostow, J., & Pavlik, P. (eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education: 16th International Conference (AIED 2013) (pp. 832–835). Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar

Forsyth, C. M., Pavlik, P., Graesser, A. C., Cai, Z., Germany, M., Millis, K., Butler, H., Halpern, D. F., & Dolan, R. (2012). Learning gains for core concepts in a serious game on scientific reasoning. In Yacef, K., Zaïane, O., Hershkovitz, H., Yudelson, M., & Stamper, J. (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (pp. 172–175). Chania: International Educational Data Mining Society.Google Scholar

Franco, A. H. R., Butler, H. A., & Halpern, D. F. (2015). Teaching critical thinking to promote learning. In Dunn, D. S. (ed.), The Oxford handbook of psychology education (pp. 65–74). New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/0.1093/oxfordhb/9780199933815.013.007Google Scholar

Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19, 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1257/089533005775196732Google Scholar

Furnham, A. & Monsen, J. (2009). Personality traits and intelligence predicts academic school grades. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 28–33.Google Scholar

Grossmann, I., Varnum, M. E. W., Na, J., Kitayama, S., & Nisbett, R. E. (2013). A route to well-being: Intelligence versus wise reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142, 944–953.Google Scholar

Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: Dispositions, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 53, 449–455.Google Scholar

Halpern, D. F. (2012). “Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment.” SCHUHFRIED (Vienna Test System) (website).https://www.schuhfried.com/test/HCTAGoogle Scholar

Halpern, D. F. (2014). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking, 5th edn. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Halpern, D. F. & Hakel, M. D. (2003). Applying the science of learning to the university and beyond: Teaching for long-term retention and transfer. Change, July/August, 2–13.Google Scholar

Halpern, D. F., Millis, K., Graesser., A., Butler, H., Forsyth, C. & Cai, Z. (2012). Operation ARA: A computerized learning game that teaches critical thinking and scientific reasoning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 7, 93–100.Google Scholar

Hart Research Associates. (2015). Falling short? College learning and career success Washington, DC: Hart Research Associates. www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/LEAP/2015employerstudentsurvey.pdfGoogle Scholar

Heijltjes, A., Van, Gog, T., & Paas, F. (2014). Improving students’ critical thinking: Empirical support for explicit instructions combined with practice. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, 518–530. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3025Google Scholar

Huber, C. R. & Kuncel, N. R. (2016). Does college teach critical thinking? A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86, 431–468. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315605917Google Scholar

Hunter, J. E. & Schmidt, F. L. (1996). Intelligence and job performance: Economic and social implications. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2, 447–472.Google Scholar

Jansen, A., Melchers, K. G., Lievens, F., Kleinmann, M., Brändli, M., Fraefel, L., & König, C. J. (2013). Situation assessment as an ignored factor in the behavioral consistency paradigm underlying the validity of personnel selection procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 326–341. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031257Google Scholar

Kahneman, D. (2013). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar

Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. A., & Ones, D. S. (2004). Academic performance, career potential, creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 148–161.Google Scholar

Kuncel, N. R., Ones, D. S., & Sackett, P. R. (2010). Individual differences as predictors of work, educational, and broad life outcomes. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 331–336.Google Scholar

Lubinski, D., Benbow, C. P., Webb, R. M., & Bleske-Rechek, A. (2006). Tracking exceptional human capital over two decades. Psychological Science, 17, 194–199. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9280.2006.01685.xGoogle Scholar

Marin, L. & Halpern, D. F. (2011). Pedagogy for developing critical thinking in adolescents: Explicit instruction produces greatest gains. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6, 1–13https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2010.08Google Scholar

Mosley, D., Miller, J., & Higgins, S. (2003). Thinking skills frameworks for use in education and training. Paper prepared for the Knowledge and Skills for Learning to Learn Seminar. London, UK.Google Scholar

National Center for Health Statistics. (2015). Health, United States, 2015, with special feature on racial and ethnic health disparities. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar

Otto, S. (2016). A plan to defend against the war on science. Scientific American. October 9, 2016. www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-plan-to-defend-against-the-war-on-science/Google Scholar

P21 (Partnership for 21st Century Learning). (n.d.). “List of Exemplar Schools” (website). http://www.p21.org/exemplar-program-case-studies/about-the-programGoogle Scholar

Schwartz, J. A., Savolainen, J., Aaltonen, M., Merikukka, M., Paananen, R., & Gissler, M. (2015). Intelligence and criminal behavior in a total birth cohort: An examination of functional form, dimensions of intelligence, and the nature of offending. Intelligence, 51, 109–118.Google Scholar

Soars, D. L., Lemos, G. C., Primi, R., & Almeida, L. S. (2015). Learning and Individual Differences, 41, 73–78.Google Scholar

Stanovich, K. E. (2010). What intelligence tests miss: The psychology of rational thought. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Stanovich, K. E. & West, R. F. (2008). On the failure of cognitive ability to predict myside and one-sided thinking biases. Thinking & Reasoning, 14, 129–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780701679764Google Scholar

Stanovich, K. E., West, R. F., & Toplak, M. E. (2016). The rationality quotient: Toward a test of rational thinking. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Strauss, V. (2012). Texas GOP rejects “critical thinking” skills. Really. The Washington Post. July 9, 2012. www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/texas-gop-rejects-critical-thinking-skills-really/2012/07/08/gJQAHNpFXW_blog.htmlGoogle Scholar

Tiruneh, D. T., Weldeslassie, A. G., Kassa, A., Tefera, Z., De Cock, M., & Elen, J. (2016). Systematic design of a learning environment for domain-specific and domain-general critical thinking skills. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(3), 481–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015–9417-2Google Scholar

Van der Linden, S. (2013). New psychological research helps explain why some see intricate government conspiracies behind events like 9/11 or the Boston bombing. Scientific American. April 30, 2013. www.scientificamerican.com/article/moon-landing-faked-hy-people-believe-conspiracy-theories/Google Scholar

Van der Linden, S. L., Leiserowitz, A. A., Feinberg, G. D., & Maibach, E. W. (2015). The scientific consensus on climate change as a gateway belief: Experimental evidence. PLoS ONE, 10(2): e0118489. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118489Google Scholar

AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). (1993). Benchmarks for scientific literacy: A project 2061 report. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Adey, P. & Shayer, M. (1990). Accelerating the development of formal thinking in middle and high school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 267–285.Google Scholar

Amsel, E. & Brock, S. (1996). The development of evidence evaluation skills. Cognitive Development, 11, 523–550.Google Scholar

Bulloch, M. J. & Opfer, J. E. (2009). What makes relational reasoning smart? Revisiting the perceptual‐to‐relational shift in the development of generalization. Developmental Science, 12(1), 114–122.Google Scholar

Bullock, M. & Gelman, R. (1979). Preschool children’s assumptions about cause and effect: Temporal ordering. Child Development, 50(1), 89–96.Google Scholar

Bullock, M. & Ziegler, A. (1999). Scientific reasoning: Developmental and individual differences. In Weinert, F. E. & Schneider, W. (eds.), Individual development from 3 to 12: Findings from the Munich longitudinal study (pp. 38–54). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Carey, S., Evans, R., Honda, M., Jay, E., & Unger, C. (1989) “An experiment is when you try it and see if it works”: A study of grade 7 students’ understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 514–529.Google Scholar

Chen, Z. & Klahr, D. (1999). All other things being equal: Children’s acquisition of the control of variables strategy, Child Development, 70(5), 1098–1120.Google Scholar

Chen, Z. & Klahr, D. (2008). Remote transfer of scientific-reasoning and problem-solving strategies in children. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 36, 420.Google Scholar

Chi, M. T. (2013). Two kinds and four sub-types of misconceived knowledge, ways to change it, and the learning outcomes. In Vosniadou, S. (ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 49–70). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Chinn, C. A. & Brewer, W. F. (1998). An empirical test of a taxonomy of responses to anomalous data in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 623–654.Google Scholar

Chinn, C. A. & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Children’s responses to anomalous scientific data: How is conceptual change impeded? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 327–343.Google Scholar

Chouinard, M. M. (2007). Children’s questions: A mechanism for cognitive development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 72, 1–129.Google Scholar

Christie, S. & Gentner, D. (2010). Where hypotheses come from: Learning new relations by structural alignment. Journal of Cognition and Development, 11(3), 356–373.Google Scholar

Clement, J. (1982). Students’ preconceptions in introductory mechanics. The American Journal of Physics, 50(1), 66–71.Google Scholar

Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students’ preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1241–1257.Google Scholar

Clement, J. (2000). Model based learning as a key research area for science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1041–1053.Google Scholar

Croker, S. & Buchanan, H. (2011). Scientific reasoning in a real world context: The effect of prior belief and outcome on children’s hypothesis testing strategies. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 29, 409–424.Google Scholar

DeLoache, J. S. (1987). Rapid change in the symbolic functioning of very young children. Science, 238(4833), 1556–1557.Google Scholar

Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 365–395). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists think: On-line creativity and conceptual change in science. In Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Viad, J. (eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 461–493). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

Echevarria, M. (2003). Anomalies as a catalyst for middle school students’ knowledge construction and scientific reasoning during science inquiry. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 357–374.Google Scholar

Ero-Tolliver, I., Lucas, D., & Schauble, L. (2013). Young children’s thinking about decomposition: Early modeling entrees to complex ideas in science. Research in Science Education, 43, 2137–2152.Google Scholar

Fay, A. & Klahr, D. (1996). Knowing about guessing and guessing about knowing: Preschoolers’ understanding of indeterminacy. Child Development, 67, 689–716.Google Scholar

French, L. A. & Woodring, S. D. (2013). Science education in the early years. In Saracho, O. N. & Spodek, B. (eds.), Handbook of research on the education of young children, 3rd edn (pp. 179–196). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Gadgil, S. M., Nokes, T. J., & Chi, M. T. H. (2013). Effectiveness of holistic mental model confrontation in driving conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 22, 47–61.Google Scholar

Gelman, S. A., & Coley, J. D. (1990). The importance of knowing a dodo is a bird: Categories and inferences in 2-year-old children. Developmental Psychology, 26(5), 796.Google Scholar

Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155–170.Google Scholar

Gentner, D. (2010). Bootstrapping the mind: Analogical processes and symbol systems. Cognitive Science, 34, 752–775.Google Scholar

Gentner, D., Brem, S., Ferguson, R. W., Markman, A. B., Levidow, B. B., Wolff, P., & Forbus, K. D. (1997). Analogical reasoning and conceptual change: A case study of Johannes Kepler. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 3–40.Google Scholar

Gick, M. L. & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15(1), 1–38.Google Scholar

Gobert, J. D. & Clement, J. J. (1999). Effects of student-generated diagrams versus student-generated summaries on conceptual understanding of causal and dynamic knowledge in plate tectonics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(1), 39–53.Google Scholar

Gopnik, A., Meltzoff, A. N., & Kuhl, P. K. (2000). The scientist in the crib: What early learning tells us about the mind. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar

Gopnik, A. & Sobel, D. M. (2000). Detecting blickets: How young children use information about novel causal powers in categorization and induction. Child Development, 71(5), 1205–1222.Google Scholar

Goswami, U. (1991). Analogical reasoning: What develops? A review of research and theory. Child Development, 62(1), 1–22.Google Scholar

Greif, M. L., Kemler Nelson, D. G., Keil, F. C., & Gutierrez, F. (2006). What do children want to know about animals and artifacts? Domain-specific requests for information. Psychological Science, 17, 455.Google Scholar

Grosslight, L., Unger, C., Jay, E., & Smith, C. L. (1991). Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 799–822.Google Scholar

Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2015). Young children’s ideas about physical science concepts. In Trundle, K. C. & Sackes, M. (eds.), Research in early childhood science education (pp. 67–97). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

Holland, J. H., Holyoak, K. J., Nisbett, R. E., & Thagard, P. R. (1986). Induction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hopkins, E. J., Dore, R. A., & Lillard, A. S. (2015). Do children learn from pretense?, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 130, 1–18. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2014.09.004Google Scholar

Horton, C. (2007) Student alternative conceptions in chemistry. California Journal of Science Education, 7(2), 23–38.Google Scholar

Inagaki, K. & Hatano, G. (2008). Conceptual change in naïve biology. In Vosniadou, S. (ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 240–262). New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar

Inhelder, B. & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Jee, B. D., Uttal, D. H., Gentner, D., Manduca, C., Shipley, T. F., & Sageman, B. (2013). Finding faults: Analogical comparison supports spatial concept learning in geoscience. Cognitive Processing, 14(2), 175–187.Google Scholar

Jirout, J. & Klahr, D. (2012). Children’s scientific curiosity: In search of an operational definition of an elusive concept. Developmental Review, 32, 125–160.Google Scholar

Keil, F. C. (2006). Explanation and understanding. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 227–254.Google Scholar

Keil, F. C., Smith, W. C., Simons, D. J., & Levin, D. T. (1998). Two dogmas of conceptual empiricism: Implications for hybrid models of the structure of knowledge. Cognition, 65(2), 103–135.Google Scholar

Keil, F.C. & Wilson, R.A. (eds.) (2000). Explanation and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Kelemen, D., Emmons, N., Seston, R., & Ganea, P. (2014). Young children can be taught basic natural selection using a picture storybook intervention. Psychological Science, 25, 893–902.Google Scholar

King, A. (1991). Effects of training in strategic questioning on children’s problem-solving performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 307–317.Google Scholar

Klahr, D. (1994). Searching for the cognition in cognitive models of science. Psycoloquy, 5(94), 7–13.Google Scholar

Klahr, D. (2000). Exploring science: The cognition and development of discovery processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Klahr, D. & Carver, S. (1995). Scientific thinking about scientific thinking. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 60(4), 137–151.Google Scholar

Klahr, D. & Dunbar, K. (1988). Dual search space during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 12, 1–48.Google Scholar

Klahr, D., Fay, A., & Dunbar, K. (1993). Heuristics for scientific experimentation: A developmental study. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 111–146.Google Scholar

Klahr, D., Zimmerman, C., & Jirout, J. (2011). Educational interventions to advance children’s scientific thinking. Science, 333, 971–975.Google Scholar

Koerber, S., Sodian, B., Thoermer, C., & Nett, U. (2005). Scientific reasoning in young children: Preschoolers’ ability to evaluate covariation evidence. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 64, 141–152.Google Scholar

Koslowski, B. (1996). Theory and evidence: The development of scientific reasoning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Koslowski, B. (2012) How explanation makes information evidentially relevant. In Proctor, R. & Capaldi, J. (eds.), The psychology of science: Implicit and explicit processes (pp. 112–136). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Koslowski, B. (2013). Scientific reasoning: Explanation, confirmation bias, and scientific practice. In Feist, G. & Gorman, M. (eds.), Handbook of the psychology of science (pp. 151–192). New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Koslowski, B., Marasia, J., Chelenza, M., & Dublin, R. (2008). Information becomes evidence when an explanation can incorporate it into a causal framework. Cognitive Development, 23, 472–487.Google Scholar

Kotovsky, L. & Gentner, D. (1996). Comparison and categorization in the development of relational similarity. Child Development, 67(6), 2797–2822. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131753Google Scholar

Kuhn, D. (1989). Children and adults as intuitive scientists. Psychological Review, 96, 674–689.Google Scholar

Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for Thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, D. (2007). Reasoning about multiple variables: Control of variables is not the only challenge. Science Education, 91, 710–726.Google Scholar

Kuhn, D. (2011). What is scientific thinking and how does it develop? In Goswami, U. (ed.), Handbook of childhood cognitive development, 2nd edn (pp. 497–523). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., & O’Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, D., Black, J., Keselman, A., & Kaplan, D. (2000). The development of cognitive skills to support inquiry learning. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 495–523.Google Scholar

Kuhn, D. & Dean, D. (2005). Is developing scientific thinking all about learning to control variables?, Psychological Science, 16, 866–870.Google Scholar

Kuhn, D., Garcia-Mila, M., Zohar, A., & Andersen, C. (1995). Strategies of knowledge acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 60, v–128Google Scholar

Kurtz, K. J. & Gentner, D. (2013). Detecting anomalous features in complex stimuli: The role of structured comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 19(3), 219.Google Scholar

Lehrer, R. & Schauble, L. (2000). Developing model-based reasoning in mathematics and science. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21, 39–48.Google Scholar

Lehrer, R. & Schauble, L. (2004). Modeling natural variation through distribution. American Educational Research Journal, 41, 635–679.Google Scholar

Lehrer, R. & Schauble, L. (2012). Seeding evolutionary thinking by engaging children in modeling its foundations. Science Education, 96, 701–724.Google Scholar

Lehrer, R., Schauble, L., & Lucas, D. (2008). Supporting development of the epistemology of inquiry. Cognitive Development, 23, 512–529.Google Scholar

Lehrer, R., Schauble, L., & Petrosino, A. J. (2001). Reconsidering the role of experiment in science education. In Crowley, K., Schunn, C., & Okada, T. (eds.), Designing for science: Implications from everyday, classroom, and professional settings (pp. 251–277). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Lewis, E. L. & Linn, M. C. (1994). Heat energy and temperature concepts of adolescents, adults, and experts: Implications for curricular improvements. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(6), 657–677.Google Scholar

Li, J., Klahr, D., & Siler, S. (2006). What lies beneath the science achievement gap? The challenges of aligning science instruction with standards and tests. Science Educator, 15, 1–12.Google Scholar

Lilienfeld, S.O., Ammirati, R., & David, M. (2012). Distinguishing science from pseudoscience in school psychology: Science and scientific thinking as safeguards against human error. Journal of School Psychology, 1, 7–36.Google Scholar

Loewenstein, G. (1994). The psychology of curiosity: A review and reinterpretation. Psychological Bulletin, 116(1), 75–98.Google Scholar

Lorch, R.F. Jr., Lorch, E.P., Calderhead, W.J. et al. (2010). Learning the control of variables strategy in higher- and lower-achieving classrooms: Contributions of explicit instruction and experimentation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1, 90–101.Google Scholar

Masnick, A. M., Klahr, D., & Morris, B. J. (2007). Separating signal from noise: Children’s understanding of error and variability in experimental outcomes. In Lovett, M. & Shaw, P. (eds.), Thinking with data (pp. 3–26). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Masnick, A. M., Klahr, D, & Knowles, E. R. (2016). Data-driven belief revision in children and adults. Journal of Cognition and Development, 18(1), 87–109.Google Scholar

Masnick, A. M. & Morris, B. J. (2008). Investigating the development of data evaluation: The role of data characteristics. Child Development, 79, 1032–1048.Google Scholar

Matlen, B.J., Vosniadou, S., Jee, B., & Ptouchkina, M. (2011). Enhancing the comprehension of science text through visual analogies. In Carlson, L., Holscher, C., and Shipley, T. (eds.), Proceedings of the 34th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2910–2915).Google Scholar

Matlen, B.J., Gentner, D., & Franconeri, S. (2014). Structure mapping in visual comparison: Embodied correspondence lines? Poster presented at the 37th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Pasadena, California, July 22–25.Google Scholar

Matlen, B.J. & Klahr, D. (2013) Sequential effects of high and low instructional guidance on children’s acquisition and transfer of experimentation skills. Instructional Science, 41, 621. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9248-zGoogle Scholar

Metz, K. E. (1995). Reassessment of developmental constraints on children’s science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 65, 93–127.Google Scholar

Metz, K. E. (1997). On the complex relation between cognitive developmental research and children’s science curricula. Review of Educational Research, 67, 151–163.Google Scholar

Minstrell, J. (1992). Facets of students’ knowledge and relevant instruction. In Duit, R., Goldberg, F., & Niedderer, H. (eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies, proceedings of an international workshop (pp. 110–128). Kiel: IPN.Google Scholar

Morris, B. J., Croker, S., Masnick, A. M., & Zimmerman, C. (2012). The emergence of scientific reasoning. In Kloos, H., Morris, B. J., and Amaral, J. L. (eds.), Current topics in children’s learning and cognition (pp. 61–82). Rijeka: InTech.Google Scholar

Mynatt, C. R., Doherty, M. E., & Tweney, R. D. (1977). Confirmation bias in a simulated research environment: An experimental study of scientific inference. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29, 85–95.Google Scholar

Mynatt, C. R., Doherty, M. E., & Tweney, R. D. (1978). Consequences of confirmation and disconfirmation in a simulated research environment. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 30, 395–406.Google Scholar

NAEYC (National Association for the Education of Young Children). (2012). All criteria document. https://www.naeyc.org/our-work/families/10-naeyc-program-standardsGoogle Scholar

NEGP (National Education Goals Panel). (1993). Promises to keep: Creating high standards for American students. Washington, DC: National Education Goals Panel.Google Scholar

NEGP (National Education Goals Panel) (1995). The 1995 national education goals report: Building a nation of learners. Washington, DC: National Education Goals Panel.Google Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. (2008). Creating scientific concepts. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Newell, A. & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar

NRC (National Research Council). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar

NRC (National Research Council) (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar

NRC (National Research Council) (2008). Ready, Set, SCIENCE! Putting Research to Work in K-8 Science Classrooms. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar

NRC (National Research Council) (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar

NRC (National Research Council) (2015) Reaching students: What research says about effective instruction in undergraduate science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18687Google Scholar

NSTA (National Science Teachers Association). (2007). NSTA position statement: The integral role of laboratory investigations in science instruction. www.nsta.org/about/positions/laboratory.aspx. Accessed March 18, 2013.Google Scholar

Opfer, J. E. & Siegler, R. S. (2004). Revisiting preschoolers’ living things concept: A microgenetic analysis of conceptual change in basic biology. Cognitive Psychology, 49(4), 301–332.Google Scholar

Osterhaus, C., Koerber, S., & Sodian, B. (2017). Scientific thinking in elementary school: Children’s social cognition and their epistemological understanding promote experimentation skills. Developmental Psychology, 53(3), 450–462.Google Scholar

Penner, D. E., Giles, N. D., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (1997). Building functional models: Designing an elbow. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(2), 125–143.Google Scholar

Penner, D. E. & Klahr, D. (1996a). The interaction of domain-specific knowledge and domain-general discovery strategies: A study with sinking objects. Child Development, 67, 2709–2727.Google Scholar

Penner, D. E. & Klahr, D. (1996b). When to trust the data: Further investigations of system error in a scientific reasoning task. Memory and Cognition, 24, 655–668.Google Scholar

Penner, D. E., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (1998). From physical models to biomechanics: A design-based modeling approach. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3–4), 429–449.Google Scholar

Piaget, J. (1929 ). The child’s conception of the world. London: Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Piaget, J. (1970). Genetic epistemology. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Piekny, J. & Maehler, C. (2013). Scientific reasoning in early and middle childhood: The development of domain-general evidence evaluation, experimentation, and hypothesis generation skills. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 31, 153–179.Google Scholar

Quellmalz, E. S., Timms, M. J., Silberglitt, M. D., & Buckley, B. C. (2012). Science assessments for all: Integrating science simulations into balanced state science assessment systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 363–393.Google Scholar

Raghavan, K. & Glaser, R. (1995). Model–based analysis and reasoning in science: The MARS curriculum. Science Education, 79(1), 37–61.Google Scholar

Rakison, D. H., Lupyan, G., Oakes, L. M., & Walker-Andrews, A. S. (2008). Developing object concepts in infancy: An associative learning perspective [Monograph]. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 73(1), i–127.Google Scholar

Renken, M. D. & Nunez, N. (2010). Evidence for improved conclusion accuracy after reading about rather than conducting a belief-inconsistent simple physics experiment. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24, 792–811.Google Scholar

Richland, L. E. & McDonough, I. M. (2010). Learning by analogy: Discriminating between potential analogs. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(1), 28–43.Google Scholar

Ruffman, T., Perner, J., Olson, D. R., & Doherty, M. (1993). Reflecting on scientific thinking: Children’s understanding of the hypothesis-evidence relation. Child Development, 64, 1617–1636.Google Scholar

Samarapungavan, A., Mantzicopoulos, P., & Patrick, H. (2008). Learning science through inquiry in kindergarten. Science Education, 92, 868–908.Google Scholar

Santau, A. O., Maerten-Rivera, J. L., Bovis, S., & Orend, J. (2014). A mile wide or an inch deep? Improving elementary preservice teachers’ science content knowledge within the context of a science methods course. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 953. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9402-3Google Scholar

Schauble, L. (1996). The development of scientific reasoning in knowledge-rich contexts. Developmental Psychology, 32, 102–119.Google Scholar

Schuster, D., Cobern, W. W., Adams, B. A., Undreiu, A., & Pleasants, B. (2017). Learning of core disciplinary ideas: Efficacy comparison of two contrasting modes of science instruction. Research in Science Education, 43, 1–47.Google Scholar

Schwichow, M., Croker, S., Zimmerman, C., Höffler, T., & Härtig, H. (2016). The control-of-variables strategy: A meta-analysis. Developmental Review, 39, 37–63.Google Scholar

Schwichow, M., Zimmerman, C., Croker, S., & Härtig, H. (2016). What students learn from hands-on activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, 980–1002.Google Scholar

Shtulman, A. (2017). Scienceblind: Why our intuitive theories about the world are so often wrong. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Siler, S. & Klahr, D. (2012). Detecting, classifying and remediating children’s explicit and implicit misconceptions about experimental design. In Proctor, R. W. & Capaldi, E. J. (eds.), Psychology of science: Implicit and explicit processes (pp. 137–180). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Siler, S., Klahr, D., & Matlen, B. (2013). Conceptual change in experimental design: From engineering goal to science goals. In Vosniadau, S. (ed.), Handbook of research on conceptual change, 2nd edn. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Singer, S. R., Nielsen, N. R. & Schweingruber, H. A. (eds.) (2012). Discipline-based education research: Understanding and improving learning in undergraduate science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar

Sloutsky, V. M. & Fisher, A. V. (2004). Induction and categorization in young children: A similarity-based model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(2), 166–188.Google Scholar

Smith, L. B., Jones, S. S., & Landau, B. (1996). Naming in young children: A dumb attentional mechanism? Cognition, 60(2), 143–171.Google Scholar

Sodian, B., Zaitchik, D., & Carey, S. (1991). Young children’s differentiation of hypothetical beliefs from evidence. Child Development, 62, 753–766.Google Scholar

Sutherland, S. L. & Friedman, O. (2013). Just pretending can be really learning: Children use pretend play as a source for acquiring generic knowledge. Developmental Psychology, 49(9), 1660–1668. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0030788Google Scholar

Treagust, D. F., Chittleborough, G., & Mamiala, T. L. (2002). Students’ understanding of the role of scientific models in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 357–368.Google Scholar

Triona, L. & Klahr, D. (2008). Hands-on science: Does it matter what the students’ hands are on? The Science Education Review, 6(4), 126–130.Google Scholar

Tschirgi, J. E. (1980). Sensible reasoning: A hypothesis about hypotheses. Child Development, 51, 1–10.Google Scholar

Uttal, D. H., Fisher, J. A., & Taylor, H. A. (2006). Words and maps: Children’s mental models of spatial information acquired from maps and from descriptions. Developmental Science, 9(2), 221–235.Google Scholar

Vendetti, M. S., Matlen, B. J., Richland, L. E., & Bunge, S. A. (2015). Analogical reasoning in the classroom: Insights from cognitive science. Mind, Brain, and Education, 9(2), 100–106.Google Scholar

Vosniadou, S. (ed.) (2013). International handbook of research on conceptual change. 2nd edn. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Vosniadou, S. & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 535–585.Google Scholar

Vosniadou, S. & Brewer, W. F. (1994). Mental models of the day/night cycle. Cognitive Science, 18, 123–183.Google Scholar

Wiser, M. & Smith, C. L. (2008). Learning and teaching about matter in grades K-8: When should the atomic-molecular theory be introduced. In Vosiadou, S. (ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 205–239). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Wright, S. B., Matlen, B. J., Baym, C. L., Ferrer, E., & Bunge, S. A. (2008). Neural correlates of fluid reasoning in children and adults. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 1(8). http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/neuro.09.008.2007Google Scholar

Zimmerman, C. & Croker, S. (2014). A prospective cognition analysis of scientific thinking and the implications for teaching and learning science. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 13, 245–257.Google Scholar

Zimmerman, C. & Cuddington, K. (2007). Ambiguous, circular and polysemous: Students’ definitions of the “balance of nature” metaphor. Public Understanding of Science, 16, 393–406.Google Scholar

Zimmerman, C. & Klahr, D. (2018). Development of scientific thinking. In Ghetti, S. (ed.), The Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience, Vol. 3: Developmental & Social Psychology (pp. 223–248). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Zimmerman, C., Raghavan, K., & Sartoris, M. L. (2003). The impact of the MARS curriculum on students’ ability to coordinate theory and evidence. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1247–1271.Google Scholar

Alibali, M. W. & DiRusso, A. A. (1999). The function of gesture in learning to count: More than keeping track. Cognitive Development, 14(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0885-2014(99)80017–3Google Scholar

Amalric, M. & Dehaene, S. (2016). Origins of the brain networks for advanced mathematics in expert mathematicians.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113, 4909–4917. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1603205113Google Scholar

Ansari, D. & Lyons, I.M. (2016). Cognitive neuroscience and mathematics learning: How far have we come? Where do we need to go? ZDM Mathematics Education, 48, 379–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-016–0782-zGoogle Scholar

Ashcraft, M. H. (1996). Cognitive psychology and simple arithmetic: A review and summary of new directions. In Butterworth, B. (ed.), Mathematical cognition. Vol. 1 (pp. 3–34). Hove, UK: Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096–3445.130.2.224Google Scholar

Ashcraft, M. H. & Kirk, E. P. (2001). The relationships among working memory, math anxiety, and performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(2), 243–248. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096–3445.130.2.224Google Scholar

Baddeley, A. D. & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. In Bower, G. (ed.), Recent advances in learning and motivation Vol. 8 (pp. 47–89). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Barth, H. & Paladino, A. M. (2011). The development of numerical estimation: Evidence against a representational shift. Developmental Science, 14(1), 125–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–7687.2010.00962.xGoogle Scholar

Barth, H., Slusser, E., Cohen, D., & Paladino, A. (2011). A sense of proportion: Commentary on Opfer, Siegler and Young. Developmental Science, 14(5), 1205–1206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–7687.2011.01081.xGoogle Scholar

Battista, M. (1981). The interaction between two instructional treatments of algebraic structures and spatial-visualization ability. The Journal of Educational Research, 74(5), 337–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1981.10885326Google Scholar

Battista, M. (1990). Spatial visualization and gender differences in high school geometry. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21(1), 47–60. https://doi.org/10.2307/749456Google Scholar

Battista, M. T., Wheatley, G. H., & Talsma, G. (1982). The importance of spatial visualization and cognitive development for geometry learning in preservice elementary teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 13(5), 332–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/749007Google Scholar

Blajenkova, O., Kozhevnikov, M., & Motes, M. A. (2006). Object-spatial imagery: A new self-report imagery questionnaire. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(2), 239–263. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1182Google Scholar

Blazhenkova, O., Becker, M., & Kozhevnikov, M. (2011). Object–spatial imagery and verbal cognitive styles in children and adolescents: Developmental trajectories in relation to ability. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(3), 281–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2010.11.012Google Scholar

Booth, J. L. & Siegler, R. S. (2006). Developmental and individual differences in pure numerical estimation. Developmental Psychology, 41(6), 189–201. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012–1649.41.6.189Google Scholar

Booth, J. L. & Siegler, R. S. (2008). Numerical magnitude representations influence arithmetic learning. Child Development, 79(4), 1016–1031. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–8624.2008.01173.xGoogle Scholar

Bremigan, E. G. (2005). An analysis of diagram modification and construction in students’ solutions to applied calculus problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36(3), 248–277.Google Scholar

Carey, S. (2009). The origin of concepts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Casey, B. M., Dearing, E., Dulaney, A., Heyman, M., & Springer, R. (2014). Young girls’ spatial and arithmetic performance: The mediating role of maternal supportive interactions during joint spatial problem solving. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 29(4), 636–648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.07.005Google Scholar

Casey, M. B., Nuttall, R. L., & Pezaris, E. (1997). Mediators of gender differences in mathematics college entrance test scores: A comparison of spatial skills with internalized beliefs and anxieties. Developmental Psychology, 33(4), 669. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012–1649.33.4.669Google Scholar

Casey, M. B., Nuttall, R., Pezaris, E., & Benbow, C. P. (1995). The influence of spatial ability on gender differences in mathematics college entrance test-scores across diverse samples. Developmental Psychology, 31(4), 697–705. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012–1649.31.4.697Google Scholar

Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018). Ending the reading wars: Reading acquisition from novice to expert. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(1), 5–51.Google Scholar

Caviola, S., Mammarella, I. C., Cornoldi, C., & Lucangeli, D. (2012). The involvement of working memory in children’s exact and approximate mental addition. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 112(2), 141–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.02.005Google Scholar

Cheng, Y. L. & Mix, K. S. (2012). Spatial training improves children’s mathematics ability. Journal of Cognition and Development, 15(1), 2–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2012.725186Google Scholar

Cromley, J. G., Booth, J. L., Wills, T.W., Chang, B.L., Shipley, T.F., Zahner, W., Tran, N., & Madeja, M. (2017). Relation of spatial skills to high school calculus proficiency: A brief report. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 19(1), 55–68.Google Scholar

Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(3), 371–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096–3445.122.3.371Google Scholar

Dehaene, S., Izard, V., Pica, P., & Spelke, E. (2006). Core knowledge of geometry in an Amazonian indigene group. Science, 311(5759), 381–384.Google Scholar

Dehaene, S., Izard, V., Spelke, E., & Pica, P. (2008). Log or linear? Distinct intuitions of the number scale in western and Amazonian indigene cultures. Science, 320(5880), 1217–1220. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1156540Google Scholar

de Hevia, M. D. & Spelke, E. S. (2010). Number-space mapping in human infants. Psychological Science, 21(5), 653–660. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610366091Google Scholar

Delgado, A. R. & Prieto, G. (2004). Cognitive mediators and sex-related differences in mathematics. Intelligence, 32(1), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-2896(03)00061–8Google Scholar

Duffy, S., Huttenlocher, J., & Levine, S. (2005). It is all relative: How young children encode extent. Journal of Cognition & Development, 6(1), 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327647jcd0601_4Google Scholar

Ebersbach, M. (2015). Evidence for a spatial–numerical association in kindergartners using a number line task. Journal of Cognition and Development, 16(1), 118–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2013.805134Google Scholar

Ebersbach, M., Luwel, K., Frick, A., Onghena, P., & Verschaffel, L. (2008). The relationship between the shape of the mental number line and familiarity with numbers in 5- to 9-year old children: Evidence for a segmented linear model. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 99(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2007.08.006Google Scholar

Eccles, J., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. In Spence, J. T. (ed.), Achievement and achievement motives. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar

Elliot, A. J. & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(1), 218–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.72.1.218Google Scholar

Feigenson, L., Dehaene, S., & Spelke, E. (2004). Core systems of number. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(7), 307–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.05.002Google Scholar

Frick, A. & Newcombe, N. S. (2012). Getting the big picture: Development of spatial scaling abilities. Cognitive Development, 27(3), 270–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2012.05.004Google Scholar

Friedman, L. (1995). The space factor in mathematics: Gender differences. Review of Educational Research, 65(1), 22–50.Google Scholar

Fuchs, L. S., Schumacher, R. F., Long, J., Namkung, J., Hamlett, C. L., Cirino, P. T., Changas, P. (2013). Improving at-risk learners’ understanding of fractions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 683–700. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032446Google Scholar

Gathercole, S. E. & Pickering, S. J. (2000). Working memory deficits in children with low achievements in the national curriculum at 7 years of age. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70(2), 177–194. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709900158047Google Scholar

Gathercole, S. E., Pickering, S. J., Ambridge, B., & Wearing, H. (2004). The structure of working memory from 4 to 15 years of age. Developmental Psychology, 40(2), 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012–1649.40.2.177Google Scholar

Geary, D. C., Hoard, M. K., Byrd-Craven, J., & Catherine DeSoto, M. (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(2), 121–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2004.03.002Google Scholar

Geary, D. C., Hoard, M. K., Byrd-Craven, J., Nugent, L., & Numtee, C. (2007). Cognitive mechanisms underlying achievement deficits in children with mathematical learning disability. Child Development, 78(4), 1343–1359. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–8624.2007.01069.xGoogle Scholar

Giofrè, D., Mammarella, I. C., Ronconi, L., & Cornoldi, C. (2013). Visuospatial working memory in intuitive geometry, and in academic achievement in geometry. Learning and Individual Differences, 23, 114–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.09.012Google Scholar

Grabner, R. H., Ansari, D., Koschutnig, K., Reishofer, G., Ebner, F., & Neuper, C. (2009). To retrieve or to calculate? Left angular gyrus mediates the retrieval of arithmetic facts during problem solving. Neuropsychologia, 47(2), 604–608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.10.013Google Scholar

Grabner, R. H., Ansari, D., Reishofer, G., Stern, E., Ebner, F., & Neuper, C. (2007). Individual differences in mathematical competence predict parietal brain activation during mental calculation. NeuroImage, 38(2), 346–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.07.041Google Scholar

Grissmer, D., Mashburn, A., Cottone, E., Brock, L., Murrah, W., Blodgett, J., Cameron, C. (2013). The efficacy of minds in motion on children’s development of executive function, visuo-spatial and math skills. Paper presented at the Society for Research in Educational Effectiveness Conference, Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Gunderson, E. A., Ramirez, G., Beilock, S. L., & Levine, S. C. (2012). The relation between spatial skill and early number knowledge: The role of the linear number line. Developmental Psychology, 48(5), 1229–1241. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027433Google Scholar

Halberda, J. & Feigenson, L. (2008). Developmental change in the acuity of the “number sense”: The approximate number system in 3-, 4-, 5-, and 6-year-olds and adults. Developmental Psychology, 44(5), 1457–1465. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012682Google Scholar

Hambrick, D. Z., Libarkin, J. C., Petcovic, H. L., Baker, K. M., Elkins, J., Callahan, C. N., … LaDue, N. D. (2012). A test of the circumvention-of-limits hypothesis in scientific problem solving: The case of geological bedrock mapping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(3), 397–403. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025927 and https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025927.supp (Supplemental)Google Scholar

Hamdan, N. & Gunderson, E. A. (2016). The number line is a critical spatial-numerical representation: Evidence from a fraction intervention. Developmental Psychology, https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000252 and https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000252.supp (Supplemental)Google Scholar

Hawes, Z., Moss, J., Caswell, B., Naqvi, S., & MacKinnon, S. (2017). Enhancing children’s spatial and numerical skills through a dynamic spatial approach to early geometry instruction: Effects of a 32-week intervention. Cognition and Instruction, 35(3), 236–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2017.1323902Google Scholar

Hawes, Z., Moss, J., Caswell, B., & Poliszczuk, D. (2015). Effects of mental rotation training on children’s spatial and mathematics performance: A randomized controlled study. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 4(3), 60–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2015.05.001Google Scholar

Heathcote, D. (1994). The role of visuo-spatial working memory in the mental addition of multi-digit addends. Current Psychology of Cognition, 13, 207–245.Google Scholar

Hegarty, M. & Kozhevnikov, M. (1999). Types of visual-spatial representations and mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 684–689. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–0663.91.4.684Google Scholar

Huttenlocher, J., Duffy, S., & Levine, S. (2002). Infants and toddlers discriminate amount: Are they measuring? Psychological Science, 13(3), 244.Google Scholar

Huttenlocher, J., Hedges, L. V., Corrigan, B., & Crawford, L. E. (2004). Spatial categories and the estimation of location. Cognition, 93(2), 75–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.006Google Scholar

Huttenlocher, J., Hedges, L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (2000). Why do categories affect stimulus judgment? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129(2), 220–241. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096–3445.129.2.220Google Scholar

Huttenlocher, J., Jordan, N. C., & Levine, S. C. (1994). A mental model for early arithmetic. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123(3), 284–296. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096–3445.123.3.284Google Scholar

Huttenlocher, J., Newcombe, N., & Sandberg, E. H. (1994). The coding of spatial location in young children. Cognitive Psychology, 27(2), 115–147. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1994.1014Google Scholar

Jones, K. (2001). Spatial thinking and visualisation. In K. Jones, Teaching and learning geometry. (pp. 55–56). London: Royal Society.Google Scholar

Jones, K. (2002). Issues in the teaching and learning of geometry. In Haggarty, L. (ed.), Aspects of teaching secondary mathematics: Perspectives on practice (pp. 121–139). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203165874Google Scholar

Jordan, N. C., Kaplan, D., Ramineni, C., & Locuniak, M. N. (2008). Development of number combination skill in the early school years: When do fingers help? Developmental Science, 11(5), 662–668. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–7687.2008.00715.xGoogle Scholar

Kaufmann, L., Wood, G., Rubinsten, O., & Henik, A. (2011). Meta-analyses of developmental fMRI studies investigating typical and atypical trajectories of number processing and calculation. Developmental Neuropsychology, 36(6), 763–787. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565641.2010.549884Google Scholar

Kim, D. & Opfer, J. E. (2017). A unified framework for bounded and unbounded numerical estimation. Developmental Psychology, 53(6), 1088. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/dev0000305Google Scholar

Kinach, B. M. (2012). Fostering spatial vs. metric understanding in geometry. Mathematics Teacher, 105(7), 534–540.Google Scholar

Kirby, J. R. & Boulter, D. R. (1999). Spatial ability and transformational geometry. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14(2), 283–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172970Google Scholar

Krajewski, K. & Schneider, W. (2009). Exploring the impact of phonological awareness, visual–spatial working memory, and preschool quantity–number competencies on mathematics achievement in elementary school: Findings from a 3-year longitudinal study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 103(4), 516–531. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2009.03.009Google Scholar

Kyttälä, M., Aunio, P., Lehto, J. E., Van Luit, J. E. H., & Hautamäki, J. (2003). Visuospatial working memory and early numeracy. Educational and Child Psychology, 20(3), 65–76.Google Scholar

Kyttälä, M. & Lehto, J. E. (2008). Some factors underlying mathematical performance: The role of visuospatial working memory and non-verbal intelligence. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 23(1), 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173141Google Scholar

Laski, E. V. & Siegler, R. S. (2007). Is 27 a big number? Correlational and causal connections among numerical categorization, number line estimation, and numerical magnitude comparison. Child Development, 78(6), 1723–1743. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–8624.2007.01087.xGoogle Scholar

Le Corre, M. (2014). Children acquire the later-greater principle after the cardinal principle. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 32(2), 163–177. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12029Google Scholar

Le Corre, M. & Carey, S. (2007). One, two, three, four, nothing more: An investigation of the conceptual sources of the verbal counting principles. Cognition, 105, 395–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.10.005Google Scholar

LeFevre, J.-A., Jimenez Lira, C., Sowinski, C., Cankaya, O., Kamawar, D., & Skwarchuk, S.-L. (2013). Charting the role of the number line in mathematical development. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00641Google Scholar

Logan, T. (2015). The influence of test mode and visuospatial ability on mathematics assessment performance. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 27(4), 423–441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-015–0143-1Google Scholar

Lourenco, S. F. & Longo, M. R. (2010). General magnitude representation in human infants. Psychological Science, 21(6), 878–881. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610370158Google Scholar

Lowrie, T., Logan, T., & Ramful, A. (2017). Visuospatial training improves elementary students’ mathematics performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), 170–186. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12142Google Scholar

McKenzie, B., Bull, R., & Gray, C. (2003). The effects of phonological and visuospatial interference on children’s arithmetical performance. Educational and Child Psychology, 20(3), 93–108.Google Scholar

Meyer, M. L., Salimpoor, V. N., Wu, S. S., Geary, D. C., & Menon, V. (2010). Differential contribution of specific working memory components to mathematics achievement in 2nd and 3rd graders. Learning and Individual Differences, 20(2), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2009.08.004Google Scholar

Miller-Cotto, D., Booth, J. L., Chang, B. L., Cromley, J. G., Newcombe, N. S., & Williams, T. A. (under review). Sketching and verbal self-explanation: Do they help middle school children solve math and science problems?Google Scholar

Mix, K. S. & Cheng, Y. L. (2012). The relation between space and math: developmental and educational implications. In Benson, J. B. (ed.), Advances in child development and behavior, Vol. 42 (pp. 197–243). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Mix, K. S., Levine, S. C., Cheng, Y.-L., Young, C., Hambrick, D. Z., Ping, R., & Konstantopoulos, S. (2016). Separate but correlated: The latent structure of space and mathematics across development. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(9), 1206–1227.Google Scholar

Moeller, K., Pixner, S., Kaufmann, L., & Nuerk, H.-C. (2009). Children’s early mental number line: Logarithmic or decomposed linear? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 103(4), 503–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2009.02.006Google Scholar

Möhring, W., Newcombe, N. S., & Frick, A. (2015). The relation between spatial thinking and proportional reasoning in preschoolers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 132, 213–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2015.01.005Google Scholar

Möhring, W., Newcombe, N., Levine, S. C., & Frick, A. (2014). A matter of proportions: Spatial scaling is related to proportional reasoning in 4- and 5-year-olds. Paper presented at the Spatial Cognition Conference, Bremen, Germany.Google Scholar

Möhring, W., Newcombe, N., Levine, S. C., & Frick, A. (2016). Spatial proportional reasoning is associated with formal knowledge about fractions. Journal of Cognition and Development, 17(1), 67–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2014.996289Google Scholar

Nath, S. & Szücs, D. (2014). Construction play and cognitive skills associated with the development of mathematical abilities in 7-year-old children. Learning and Instruction, 32(0), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.01.006Google Scholar

Opfer, J. E. & Siegler, R. S. (2007). Representational change and children’s numerical estimation. Cognitive Psychology, 55(3), 169–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.09.002Google Scholar

Opfer, J. E., Siegler, R. S., & Young, C. J. (2011). The powers of noise-fitting: Reply to Barth and Paladino. Developmental Science, 14(5), 1194–1204. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–7687.2011.01070.xGoogle Scholar

Opfer, J. E., Thompson, C. A., & Kim, D. (2016). Free versus anchored numerical estimation: A unified approach. Cognition, 149, 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.11.015Google Scholar

Peng, P., Namkung, J., Barnes, M., & Sun, C. (2016). A meta-analysis of mathematics and working memory: Moderating effects of working memory domain, type of mathematics skill, and sample characteristics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(4), 455. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000079Google Scholar

Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. (1975). The origins of the idea of chance in children. New York: Norton.Google Scholar

Pinel, P., Piazza, M., Le Bihan, D., & Dehaene, S. (2004). Distributed and overlapping cerebral representations of number, size, and luminance during comparative judgments. Neuron, 41, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(04)00107–2Google Scholar

Pittalis, M. & Christou, C. (2010). Types of reasoning in 3D geometry thinking and their relation with spatial ability. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 75(2), 191–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010–9251-8Google Scholar

Rasmussen, C. & Bisanz, J. (2005). Representation and working memory in early arithmetic. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 91(2), 137–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2005.01.004Google Scholar

Rayner, K., Foorman, B., Perfetti, C., Pesetsky, D., & Seidenberg, M. (2001). How psychological science informs the teaching of reading. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2(2), 31–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/1529–1006.00004Google Scholar

Reuhkala, M. (2001). Mathematical skills in ninth-graders: Relationship with visuo-spatial abilities and working memory. Educational Psychology, 21(4), 387–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410120090786Google Scholar

Royal Society and JMC (Joint Mathematical Council). (2001), Teaching and Learning Geometry 11–19. London: Royal Society and JMC.Google Scholar

Rugani, R & de Hevia, M.-D. (2017). Number-space associations without language: Evidence from 4 preverbal human infants and non-human animal species. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24, 352–369.Google Scholar

Samuels, J. (2010). The use of technology and visualization in calculus instruction (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Teachers College, New York.Google Scholar

Saxe, G. B., Diakow, R., & Gearhart, M. (2013). Towards curricular coherence in integers and fractions: A study of the efficacy of a lesson sequence that uses the number line as the principal representational context. ZDM Mathematics Journal, 45(3), 343–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012–0466-2Google Scholar

Sekuler, R. & Mierkiewicz, D. (1977). Children’s judgments of numerical inequality. Child Development, 48(2), 630–633. https://doi.org/10.2307/1128664Google Scholar

Sella, F., Berteletti, I., Lucangeli, D., & Zorzi, M. (2017). Preschool children use space, rather than counting, to infer the numerical magnitude of digits: Evidence for a spatial mapping principle. Cognition, 158, 56–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.10.010Google Scholar

Shea, D. L., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2001). Importance of assessing spatial ability in intellectually talented young adolescents: A 20-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 604–614. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–0663.93.3.604Google Scholar

Shepard, R. N. & Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171(3972), 701–702.Google Scholar

Shipstead, Z., Redick, T. S., & Engle, R. W. (2012). Is working memory training effective?. Psychological Bulletin, 138(4), 628–154.Google Scholar

Siegler, R. S. (2009). Improving the numerical understanding of children from low-income families. Child Development Perspectives, 3(2), 118–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750–8606.2009.00090.xGoogle Scholar

Siegler, R. S. & Booth, J. L. (2004). Development of numerical estimation in young children. Child Development, 75, 428–444. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–8624.2004.00684.xGoogle Scholar

Siegler, R. S. & Booth, J. L. (2005). Development of numerical estimation. In Campbell, J. I. D. (ed.), Handbook of mathematical cognition (pp. 197–212). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Siegler, R. S. & Opfer, J. E. (2003). The development of numerical estimation: Evidence for multiple representations of numerical quantity. Psychological Science, 14(3), 237–243. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467–9280.02438Google Scholar

Siegler, R. S. & Ramani, G. B. (2008). Playing linear numerical board games promotes low-income children’s numerical development. Developmental Science, 11(5), 655–661. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–7687.2008.00714.xGoogle Scholar

Siegler, R. S. & Ramani, G. B. (2009). Playing linear number board games – but not circular ones – improves low-income preschoolers’ numerical understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 545–560. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014239Google Scholar

Slusser, E. B., Santiago, R. T., & Barth, H. C. (2013). Developmental change in numerical estimation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(1), 193–208. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028560Google Scholar

Sorby, S., Casey, B., Veurink, N., & Dulaney, A. (2013). The role of spatial training in improving spatial and calculus performance in engineering students. Learning and Individual Differences, 26, 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.03.010Google Scholar

Soto-Calvo, E., Simmons, F. R., Willis, C., & Adams, A.-M. (2015). Identifying the cognitive predictors of early counting and calculation skills: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 140, 16–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2015.06.011Google Scholar

Spelke, E. S. & Tsivkin, S. (2001). Language and number: A bilingual training study. Cognition, 78, 45–88.Google Scholar

Spence, I. & Krizel, P. (1994). Children’s perception of proportion in graphs. Child Development, 65(4), 1193–1213. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131314Google Scholar

Stieff, M. (2007). Mental rotation and diagrammatic reasoning in science. Learning and Instruction, 17(2), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.01.012Google Scholar

Tolar, T. D., Lederberg, A. R., & Fletcher, J. M. (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(2), 239–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410802708903Google Scholar

Trbovich, P. & LeFevre, J. A. (2003). Phonological and visual working memory in mental addition. Memory and Cognition, 31(5), 738–745. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03196112Google Scholar

Trezise, K. & Reeve, R. A. (2014). Working memory, worry, and algebraic ability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 121, 120–136.Google Scholar

Usiskin, Z. (1988). Conceptions of school algebra and uses of variables. In Coxford, A. (ed.), Ideas of algebra, K-12 (pp. 8–19). Reston, VA: NCTM.Google Scholar

Uttal, D. H. & Cohen, C. A. (2012). Spatial thinking and STEM education: When, why, and how? Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 57, 147–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0–12-394293–7.00004–2Google Scholar

Uttal, D. H., Meadow, N. G., Tipton, E., Hand, L. L. Alden, A. R., Warren, C., & Newcombe, N. S. (2013). The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 352–402.Google Scholar

Vasilyeva, M. & Huttenlocher, J. (2004). Early development of scaling ability. Developmental Psychology, 40(5), 682–690. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012–1649.40.5.682Google Scholar

Verdine, B. N., Golinkoff, R. M., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Newcombe, N. S. (2017). Links between spatial and mathematical skills across the preschool years [Monograph]. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 82,(1), Serial Number 124.Google Scholar

Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2009). Spatial ability for STEM domains: Aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 817–835. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016127Google Scholar

Weckbacher, L. M. & Okamoto, Y. (2014). Mental rotation ability in relation to self-perceptions of high school geometry. Learning and Individual Differences, 30, 58–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.10.007Google Scholar

Xenidou-Dervou, I., van der Schoot, M., & van Lieshout, E. C. D. M. (2015). Working memory and number line representations in single-digit addition: Approximate versus exact, nonsymbolic versus symbolic. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(6), 1148–1167. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.977303Google Scholar

Ye, A., Resnick, I., Hansen, N., Rodrigues, J., Rinne, L., & Jordan, N. C. (2016). Pathways to fraction learning: Numerical abilities mediate the relation between early cognitive competencies and later fraction knowledge. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 152, 242–263. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2016.08.001Google Scholar

Zacks, J. M. (2007). Neuroimaging studies of mental rotation: A meta-analysis and review. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2008.20013Google Scholar

Zorzi, M., Priftis, K., & Umilta, C. (2002). Brain damage: Neglect disrupts the mental number line. Nature, 417, 138–139. https://doi.org/10.1038/417138aGoogle Scholar

Zuccheri, L. & Zudini, V. (2014). History of teaching calculus. In Karp, A. & Schubring, G. (eds.), Handbook on the history of mathematics education (pp. 493–513). New York: Springer .Google Scholar

Alcock, L., Ansari, D., Batchelor, S., Bisson, M.-J., De Smedt, B., Gilmore, C. K., … Weber, K. (2016). Challenges in mathematical cognition: A collaboratively-derived research agenda. Journal of Numerical Cognition, 2, 20–41. https://doi.org/10.5964/jnc.v2i1.10Google Scholar

Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Bailey, D. H., Zhou, X., Zhang, Y., Cui, J., Fuchs, L. S., Jordan, N. C., … Siegler, R. S. (2015). Development of fraction concepts and procedures in U.S. and Chinese children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 129, 68–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2014.08.006Google Scholar

Baroody, A. J. (1992). The development of preschoolers’ counting skills and principles. In Bideaud, J., Meljac, C., & Fischer, J. P. (eds.), Pathway to numbers: Children’s developing numerical abilities (pp. 99–126). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Baroody, A. J. (2003). The development of adaptive expertise and flexibility: The integration of conceptual and procedural knowledge. In Baroody, A. J. & Dowker, A. (eds.), The development of arithmetic concepts and skills: Constructing adaptive expertise (pp. 1–34). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Baroody, A. J., Feil, Y., & Johnson, A. R. (2007). An alternative reconceptualization of procedural and conceptual knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 115–131.Google Scholar

Baroody, A. J. & Ginsburg, H. (1986). The relationship between initial meaningful and mechanical knowledge of arithmetic. In Hiebert, J. (ed.), Conceptual and procedural knowledge: The case of mathematics. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Blöte, A. W., Van der Burg, E., & Klein, A. S. (2001). Students’ flexibility in solving two-digit addition and subtraction problems: Instruction effects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 627–638. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.93.3.627Google Scholar

Byrnes, J. P., & Wasik, B. A. (1991). Role of conceptual knowledge in mathematical procedural learning. Developmental Psychology, 27, 777–786. https://doi.org/10.1037//0012-1649.27.5.777Google Scholar

Canobi, K. H. (2005). Children’s profiles of addition and subtraction understanding. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 92, 220–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2005.06.001Google Scholar

Canobi, K. H. (2009). Concept-procedure interactions in children’s addition and subtraction. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 102, 131–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2008.07.008Google Scholar

Canobi, K. H., Reeve, R. A., & Pattison, P. E. (1998). The role of conceptual understanding in children’s addition problem solving. Developmental Psychology, 34, 882–891. https://doi.org/10.1037//0012-1649.34.5.882Google Scholar

Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., Nicholls, J., Wheatley, G., Trigatti, B., & Perlwitz, M. (1991). Assessment of a problem-centered second-grade mathematics project. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22, 3–29. https://doi.org/10.2307/749551Google Scholar

Cowan, R., Donlan, C., Shepherd, D.-L., Cole-Fletcher, R., Saxton, M., & Hurry, J. (2011). Basic calculation proficiency and mathematics achievement in elementary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 786–803. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024556Google Scholar

Crooks, N. M. & Alibali, M. W. (2014). Defining and measuring conceptual knowledge in mathematics. Developmental Review, 34, 344–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2014.10.001Google Scholar

DeCaro, M. S. (2016). Inducing mental set constrains procedural flexibility and conceptual understanding in mathematics. Memory and Cognition, 44, 1138–1148. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-016-0614-yGoogle Scholar

diSessa, A. A., Gillespie, N. M., & Esterly, J. B. (2004). Coherence versus fragmentation in the development of the concept of force. Cognitive Science, 28, 843–900.Google Scholar

Dowker, A. (2008). Individual differences in numerical abilities in preschoolers. Developmental Science, 11, 650–654. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00713.xGoogle Scholar

Faulkenberry, T. J. (2013). The conceptual/procedural distinction belongs to strategies, not tasks: A comment on Gabriel et al. (2013). Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 820. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00820Google Scholar

Fuson, K. C. (1988). Children’s counting and concept of number. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Fuson, K. C. & Briars, D. J. (1990). Using a base-ten blocks learning/teaching approach for first- and second-grade place-value and multidigit addition and subtraction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 180–206. https://doi.org/10.2307/749373Google Scholar

Fuson, K. C. & Kwon, Y. (1992). Korean children’s understanding of multidigit addition and subtraction. Child Development, 63, 491–506. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1992.tb01642.xGoogle Scholar

Gelman, R. & Meck, E. (1983). Preschoolers’ counting: Principles before skill. Cognition, 13, 343–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(83)90014–8Google Scholar

Gelman, R. & Williams, E. M. (1998). Enabling constraints for cognitive development and learning: Domain specificity and epigenesis. In Kuhn, D. & Siegler, R. S. (eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Cognition, perception, and language, Vol. 2, 5th edn (pp. 575–630). New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Gilmore, C. K. & Papadatou-Pastou, M. (2009). Patterns of individual differences in conceptual understanding and arithmetical skill: A meta-analysis. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 11, 25–40.Google Scholar

Gilmore, C. K., McCarthy, S. E., & Spelke, E. S. (2010). Non-symbolic arithmetic abilities and mathematics achievement in the first year of formal schooling. Cognition, 115, 394–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.02.002Google Scholar

Ginsburg, H. P. (1997). Entering the child’s mind: The clinical interview in psychological research and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Goldin Meadow, S., Alibali, M. W., & Church, R. B. (1993). Transitions in concept acquisition: Using the hand to read the mind. Psychological Review, 100, 279–297. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295X.100.2.279Google Scholar

Grouws, D. A. & Cebulla, K. J. (2000). Improving student achievement in mathematics. Geneva.Google Scholar

Haapasalo, L. & Kadijevich, D. (2000). Two types of mathematical knowledge and their relation. JMD – Journal for Mathematic-Didaktik, 21, 139–157.Google Scholar

Halford, G. S. (1993). Children’s understanding: The development of mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Hallett, D., Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (2010). Individual differences in conceptual and procedural knowledge when learning fractions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 395–406. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017486Google Scholar

Hecht, S. A. (1998). Toward an information-processing account of individual differences in fraction skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 545–559. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.90.3.545Google Scholar

Hecht, S. A. & Vagi, K. J. (2010). Sources of group and individual differences in emerging fraction skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 843–859. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019824Google Scholar

Hiebert, J. & Grouws, D. (2007). Effective teaching for the development of skill and conceptual understanding of number: What is most effective? Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. www.nctm.org/Research-and-Advocacy/Research-Brief-and-Clips/Effective-Instruction/.Google Scholar

Hiebert, J. & LeFevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: An introductory analysis. In Hiebert, J. (ed.), Conceptual and procedural knowledge: The case of mathematics (pp. 1–27). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Hiebert, J. & Wearne, D. (1996). Instruction, understanding, and skill in multidigit addition and subtraction. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 251–283. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1403_1Google Scholar

Jordan, J.-A., Mulhern, G., & Wylie, J. (2009). Individual differences in trajectories of arithmetical development in typically achieving 5- to 7-year-olds. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 103, 455–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2009.01.011Google Scholar

Kamii, C. & Dominick, A. (1997). To teach or not to teach algorithms. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 16, 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(97)90007–9Google Scholar