Linnea Karlsson Wirebring , Carola Wiklund-Hörnqvist , Sara Stillesjö , Carina Granberg , Johan Lithner , Micael Andersson , Lars Nyberg , Bert Jonsson
{"title":"创造性数学推理的功能磁共振干预研究:不同认知能力水平的行为和大脑效应","authors":"Linnea Karlsson Wirebring , Carola Wiklund-Hörnqvist , Sara Stillesjö , Carina Granberg , Johan Lithner , Micael Andersson , Lars Nyberg , Bert Jonsson","doi":"10.1016/j.tine.2022.100193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Many learning methods of mathematical reasoning encourage imitative procedures (<em>algorithmic reasoning, AR</em>) instead of more constructive reasoning processes (<em>creative mathematical reasoning, CMR</em>). Recent research suggest that learning with CMR compared to AR leads to better performance and differential brain activity during a subsequent test. Here, we considered the role of individual differences in cognitive ability in relation to effects of CMR.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We employed a within-subject intervention (<em>N</em>=72, <em>M</em><sub>Age</sub>=18.0) followed by a brain-imaging session (fMRI) one week later. A battery of cognitive tests preceded the intervention. Participants were divided into three cognitive ability groups based on their cognitive score (low, intermediate and high).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>On mathematical tasks previously practiced with CMR compared to AR we observed better performance, and higher brain activity in key regions for mathematical cognition such as left angular gyrus and left inferior/middle frontal gyrus. The CMR-effects did not interact with cognitive ability, albeit the effects on performance were driven by the intermediate and high cognitive ability groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Encouraging pupils to engage in constructive processes when learning mathematical reasoning confers lasting learning effects on brain activation, independent of cognitive ability. However, the lack of a CMR-effect on performance for the low cognitive ability group suggest future studies should focus on individualized learning interventions, allowing more opportunities for effortful struggle with CMR.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46228,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Neuroscience and Education","volume":"29 ","pages":"Article 100193"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949322000217/pdfft?md5=38afa777efc91a672e8d3698a69fdfb9&pid=1-s2.0-S2211949322000217-main.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An fMRI intervention study of creative mathematical reasoning: behavioral and brain effects across different levels of cognitive ability\",\"authors\":\"Linnea Karlsson Wirebring , Carola Wiklund-Hörnqvist , Sara Stillesjö , Carina Granberg , Johan Lithner , Micael Andersson , Lars Nyberg , Bert Jonsson\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tine.2022.100193\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Many learning methods of mathematical reasoning encourage imitative procedures (<em>algorithmic reasoning, AR</em>) instead of more constructive reasoning processes (<em>creative mathematical reasoning, CMR</em>). Recent research suggest that learning with CMR compared to AR leads to better performance and differential brain activity during a subsequent test. Here, we considered the role of individual differences in cognitive ability in relation to effects of CMR.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We employed a within-subject intervention (<em>N</em>=72, <em>M</em><sub>Age</sub>=18.0) followed by a brain-imaging session (fMRI) one week later. A battery of cognitive tests preceded the intervention. Participants were divided into three cognitive ability groups based on their cognitive score (low, intermediate and high).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>On mathematical tasks previously practiced with CMR compared to AR we observed better performance, and higher brain activity in key regions for mathematical cognition such as left angular gyrus and left inferior/middle frontal gyrus. The CMR-effects did not interact with cognitive ability, albeit the effects on performance were driven by the intermediate and high cognitive ability groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Encouraging pupils to engage in constructive processes when learning mathematical reasoning confers lasting learning effects on brain activation, independent of cognitive ability. However, the lack of a CMR-effect on performance for the low cognitive ability group suggest future studies should focus on individualized learning interventions, allowing more opportunities for effortful struggle with CMR.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46228,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trends in Neuroscience and Education\",\"volume\":\"29 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100193\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949322000217/pdfft?md5=38afa777efc91a672e8d3698a69fdfb9&pid=1-s2.0-S2211949322000217-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trends in Neuroscience and Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949322000217\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Neuroscience and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949322000217","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
An fMRI intervention study of creative mathematical reasoning: behavioral and brain effects across different levels of cognitive ability
Background
Many learning methods of mathematical reasoning encourage imitative procedures (algorithmic reasoning, AR) instead of more constructive reasoning processes (creative mathematical reasoning, CMR). Recent research suggest that learning with CMR compared to AR leads to better performance and differential brain activity during a subsequent test. Here, we considered the role of individual differences in cognitive ability in relation to effects of CMR.
Methods
We employed a within-subject intervention (N=72, MAge=18.0) followed by a brain-imaging session (fMRI) one week later. A battery of cognitive tests preceded the intervention. Participants were divided into three cognitive ability groups based on their cognitive score (low, intermediate and high).
Results
On mathematical tasks previously practiced with CMR compared to AR we observed better performance, and higher brain activity in key regions for mathematical cognition such as left angular gyrus and left inferior/middle frontal gyrus. The CMR-effects did not interact with cognitive ability, albeit the effects on performance were driven by the intermediate and high cognitive ability groups.
Conclusions
Encouraging pupils to engage in constructive processes when learning mathematical reasoning confers lasting learning effects on brain activation, independent of cognitive ability. However, the lack of a CMR-effect on performance for the low cognitive ability group suggest future studies should focus on individualized learning interventions, allowing more opportunities for effortful struggle with CMR.