English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Young and older adults were asked to verify true (e.g., 5 × 61 = 305) and false (5 × 61 = 315) arithmetic problems. Half the problems were small (e.g., 5 × 17 = 85) and half were large problems (e.g., 5 × 93 = 465). Half the false problems respected the five rule (i.e., the product of an operand multiplied by five ends with either 5 or 0), and half violated this rule (e.g., 21 × 5 = 115 vs. 21 × 5 = 113). Both young and older adults showed problem-size effects (i.e., they verified small problems more quickly than large problems) and five-rule violation effects (i.e., they verified problem violating five rule more quickly than problems respecting five rule). Moreover, we found sequential modulations of these problem-size and five-rule effects. Problem-size effects were larger on current problems following large problems than after small problems, and five-rule violation effects were larger after problems violating the five rule than after no-rule violation problems. Finally, sequential modulations of problem-size effects were larger in older adults than in young adults, and there were no age-related differences in sequential modulations of five-rule violation effects. These findings speak to the determiners of arithmetic performance, as to how well arithmetic calculation and non-calculation strategies are executed and selected on current problems depends on strategies used with preceding problems.

Age-related differences in sequential modulations of problem-size and rule-violation effects during arithmetic problem verification tasks