Skip to main content
. 2017 May 10;30:251–264. doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2017.05.003

Table 2.

Details of the studies in the developmental meta-analyses, including sample size, mean age, contrast, and statistical threshold.

Study Reference N Mean age Contrast Statistical threshold
Arithmetic
A1 Davis et al. (2009a) 24 8.1 years Addition > Greek letter matching p < 0.001 uncorrected
A2 Davis et al. (2009b) 19 8.1 years Addition > Greek letter matching p < 0.001 uncorrected
A3 Meintjes et al. (2010) 16 10.5 years Addition > Greek letter matching p < 0.05 FDR
A4 Kucian et al. (2006) 10 (3rd grade)
10 (6th grade)
9.2 years
12.0 years
Exact addition > Approximate addition
Addition > Grayscale matching
p <.005 FDR
A5 Cho et al. (2011) 103 7–9.9 years Addition with retrieval > Addition with counting p <.01 FWE
A6 Rosenberg-Lee et al. (2015) 20 8.44 years Addition > Subtraction p <.01 cluster-wise
A7 Ashkenazi et al. (2012) 17 97.41 months Complex addition > Simple addition p <.01 FWE
A8 Metcalfe et al. (2013) 74 7.8 years Complex addition > Simple addition p < 0.01 uncorrected;
p < 0.05 FWE
A9 Rosenberg-Lee et al. (2015) 45 (2nd grade)
45 (3rd grade)
7.67 years
8.67 years
Complex addition > Simple addition p < 0.01 FWE
A10 Demir et al. (2014) 40 10.9 years Multiplication > Fixation p <.05 cluster-wise
A11 Kawashima et al. (2004) 8 11.6 years Multiplication > Fixation
Addition > Fixation
p <.05 corrected
A12 Kesler et al. (2006) 15 14.6 years Mixed addition and subtraction > Digit strings corrected (unspecified)
A13 Rivera et al. (2002) 16 16.97 years Mixed addition and subtraction > Digit strings p <.01 cluster-wise
A14 Price et al. (2013) 33 17 years, 11.5 months Mixed addition and subtraction > Digit matching p <.05 FDR
A15 De Smedt et al. (2011) 18 11.77 years Small addition/subtraction > Large addition/subtraction
Addition > Subtraction
p <.001voxel-wise;
p <.05 cluster-wise
A16 Chen et al. (2006) 8 (abacus experts)
8 (non-experts)
11.75 years
12.29 years
Serial addition > Viewing numbers p <.0001 uncorrected



Phonological processing
P1 Booth et al. (2004) 16 10.7 years Rhyme judgment (words) > Visual matching p <.01 corrected
P2 Booth et al. (2001) 5 11.1 years Rhyme judgment (words) > Visual matching p <.001 uncorrected
P3 Temple et al. (2001) 15 10.5 years Rhyme judgment (letters) > Letter matching p <.025 corrected
P4 Bitan et al. (2007) 36 11.7 years Rhyme judgment (words) > Fixation p <.0001 uncorrected;
p <.05 corrected
P5 Cao et al. (2008) 12 12.3 years Rhyme judgment (words) > Fixation p <.001 uncorrected
P6 Hoeft et al. (2007) 64 10 years Rhyme judgment (words) > Fixation p <.01 FDR
P7 Hoeft et al. (2006) 10 (5th grade)
10 (3rd grade)
10.95 years
8.75 years
Rhyme judgment (words) > Fixation p <.001 uncorrected
P8 Cao et al. (2006) 14 11.5 years Rhyme judgment (words) > Fixation p <.001 uncorrected
P9 McNorgan et al. (2011) 14 (young group)
12 (older group)
9.3 years
13.5 years
Rhyme judgment (words) > Fixation p <.05 FDR
P10 Backes et al. (2002) 8 11.6 years Rhyme judgment (pseudowords) > Fixation p <.05 cluster-wise
P11 Georgiewa et al. (1999) 17 14.4 years Pseudoword reading > Font strings p <.05
P12 van der Mark et al. (2009) 24 11.3 years Pseudoword reading > Fixation p <.05 FDR
P13 Noble et al. (2006) 38 7 years, 11 months Pseudoword one-back task > Fixation p <.0001 uncorrected
P14 Yamada et al. (2011) 7 5.7 years Letter one-back task > False fonts one-back task p <.05 uncorrected
P15 Bach et al. (2010) 18 8.3 years Different letter substitution > Same letter substitution
Letter substitution > null
p <.005 cluster extent threshold
P16 Bach et al. (2013) 19 6.4 years Word decoding > Symbol identification
Word decoding > Null
p <.005 cluster extent threshold