A meta-analysis of mathematics and working memory: Moderating effects of working memory domain, type of mathematics skill, and sample characteristics
Open accessAbstract
The purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine the relation between mathematics and working memory (WM) and to identify possible moderators of this relation including domains of WM, types of mathematics skills, and sample type. A meta-analysis of 110 studies with 829 effect sizes found a significant medium correlation of mathematics and WM, r = .35, 95% confidence interval [.32, .37]. Moderation analyses indicated that mathematics showed comparable association with verbal WM, numerical WM, and visuospatial WM. Word-problem solving and whole-number calculations showed the strongest relation with WM whereas geometry showed the weakest relation with WM. The relation between WM and mathematics was stronger among individuals with mathematics difficulties that are associated with other disorders or cognitive deficits compared with that among typically developing individuals and individuals with only mathematics difficulties. The implications of these findings with respect to mathematics instruction and WM training are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Working memory is correlated with reading and mathematical skills.
“Furthermore, WM is correlated with reading (Peng et al., 2018) and mathematical skills (Peng, Namkung, Barnes, & Sun, 2016).”
From Working memory training does not enhance older adults' cognitive skills: A comprehensive meta-analysis (2019) · cites this paper as Peng, Namkung, Barnes, & Sun, 2016
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 152 · Cited by 557
- Authors
- Peng, P., Namkung, J., Barnes, M., & Sun, C.
- Venue
- Journal of Educational Psychology
- Published
- 2016-05
- Volume
- 108
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 455-473
- ISSN
- 0022-0663 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2176
- OpenAlex
- W2529528176
- Cited by
- 557
- References
- 152
- Citations by year
- 2026: 73 · 2025: 70 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 81 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 10
- FWCI
- 3.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Educational Psychology (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- George Washington University
- U.S. Department of Education (R342A110270)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
- Keywords
- mathematical ability, working memory, verbal working memory, visuospatial working memory, word problem solving, geometry, mathematics learning disabilities, mathematics education, working memory training
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
