An App designed for early mathematics training. The number line estimation

Actualmente, venimos escuchando en diversos foros educativos y científicos la necesidad de trabajar en la mejora del aprendizaje matemático del alumnado. Las matemáticas son consideradas por los estudiantes unas de las materias más complejas para su comprensión. También son de las materias que presentan unos resultados menos alentadores en las calificaciones de nuestros estudiantes más jóvenes. Las investigaciones que se han centrado en el desarrollo de la competencia matemática, han destacado la necesidad de realizar una intervención temprana. Asimismo, es necesario facilitar el aprendizaje utilizando herramientas que puedan resultar atractivas a los alumnos, como puede ser el uso de las nuevas tecnologías para fines educativos. Por otro lado, la utilización de dispositivos electrónicos de uso muy extendido como “tablets” o “smartphones” pueden generar un acercamiento de la educación al entorno familiar de nuestros jóvenes, de tal manera que el niño puede acceder al aprendizaje mientras juega en casa. En este trabajo, se presenta una de las aplicaciones (APPs) diseñadas para tablet y smartphone adaptada a los diferentes sistemas operativos actuales. Están diseñadas y desarrolladas para incidir sobre la mejora del sentido numérico del niño, y destinadas al alumnado en sus primeras etapas educativas. La APP que se presenta tiene como objetivo el entrenamiento de la “estimación en la recta numérica”, siendo esta habilidad uno de los principales precursores específicos del aprendizaje en matemáticas. Esta APP se fundamenta en los modelos cognitivos de aprendizaje numérico, y a su vez aporta los beneficios derivados del uso de uno de los instrumentos más utilizados como reforzadores en la actualidad en el entorno familiar, como son las tablets y los smartphones. El objetivo principal del trabajo es contribuir en el desarrollo de las habilidades matemáticas de los niños/as de 4 a 7 años para afrontar con éxito los requerimientos de la escuela y resolver situaciones en sus vidas cotidianas.Currently, we have been hearing from various educational and scientific forums the need to improve students’ mathematical learning. Mathematics is considered one of the most complex topics for comprehension. Math also is the subject presenting lowest grades of our students. Research focused on of mathematical competence development, has highlighted the need to implement early intervention to improve further progress. Likewise, it is necessary to facilitate learning using tools that may be attractive to students, such as the use of new technologies for educational purposes. The use of high tech devices such as tablets or smartphones can approach education in the family environment of our young people. In such a way that children can learn while they are playing at home. In this work, we present one of the applications (APP) designed for tablet and smartphone, adapted to the different platforms. App is designed and developed for improvement children’s numerical sense. Apps is designed for Early Childhood Education. This APP is is focused on training number line estimation. This skill is one of the main specific mathematics learning precursor. APP is based on cognitive models of numerical learning, and provides the benefits derived from the use of one of the tools used as reinforces by families (tablets and smartphones). This work would contribute to the development of mathematical skills of children aged from 4 to 7 so that they can successfully face the school requirements for maths, solve daily lives features.peerReviewe

Rumination and social support as predictors of posttraumatic growth in women with breast cancer: a systematic review

Objective: Posttraumatic Growth (PTG) is a perceived positive change after a stressful situation. Studies describe different predictors of PTG. The purpose of this study was to (1) review the evidence that rumination and social support are predictors of PTG; (2) analyze the results of the screened studies. Method: A systematic review was conducted by searching for articles with quantitative or mixed methods that evaluated PTG using the Posttraumatic Growth Inventory, rumination and/or social support in women with breast cancer. Results: Were identified twelve articles that corresponded to the inclusion criteria. All of them reported some degree of PTG in their samples. Rumination was evaluated in three studies, social support was evaluated in ten, and both were considered to have a positive correlation with PTG. Conclusions: This review concludes that rumination and social support are predictors of PTG in women with breast cancer. These results contribute to the development of new interventions in mental health

Social challenges and actions for thinking and reasoning in the digital age

Referencias bibliográficas: • AlgoTransparency. (n.d.). https://www.algotransparency.org/ • Anderson, D. R., & Subrahmanyam, K. (2017). Digital screen media and cognitive development. Pediatrics, 140(Supplement 2), S57–S61. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-1758C • Ayres, P. (2020). Something old, something new from cognitive load theory. Computers in Human Behaviour, 113(2020), 106503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106503 • Baddeley, A. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255(5044), 556–559. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1736359 • Baddeley, A. D., Scott, D., Drynan, R., & Smith, J. C. (1969). Short-term memory and the limited capacity hypothesis. British Journal of Psychology, 60(1), 51–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1969.tb01175.x • Barr, N., Pennycook, G., Stolz, J. A., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2015). The brain in your pocket: Evidence that smartphones are used to supplant thinking. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 473–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.029 • Behar-Horenstein, L. S., & Niu, L. (2011). Teaching critical thinking skills in higher education: A review of the literature. Journal of College Teaching & Learning (TLC), 8(2), 10.19030/tlc.v8i2.3554. • Beuckels, E., Ye, G., Hudders, L., & Cauberghe, V. (2021). Media multitasking: A bibliometric approach and literature review. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 2322. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.623643 • Bode, L., & Vraga, E. K. (2015). In related news, that was wrong: The correction of misinformation through related stories functionality in social media. Journal of Communication, 65(4), 619–638. https://doi.org/10.1111/JCOM.12166 • Brady, W. J., Wills, J. A., Jost, J. T., Tucker, J. A., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2017). Emotion shapes the diffusion of moralized content in social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(28), 7313–7318. https://doi.org/10.1073/PNAS.1618923114 • Brey, P. (2017). Ethics of emerging technologies. In S. O. Hansoon (Ed.), The ethics of technology: Methods and approaches (pp. 175–192). Rowman and Littlefield International. • Brey, P. (2018). The strategic role of technology in a good society. Technology in Society, 52, 39–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHSOC.2017.02.002 • Bruns, A. (2019). Are filter bubbles real? Polity Press. • Center for Humane Technology [CHT]. (2021). https://www.humanetech.com/ • Chen, L., Nath, R., & Tang, Z. (2020). Understanding the determinants of digital distraction: An automatic thinking behavior perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 104, 106195. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHB.2019.106195 • Chernikova, O., Heitzmann, N., Stadler, M., Holzberger, D., Seidel, T., & Fischer, F. (2020). Simulation-based learning in higher education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 90(4), 499–541. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320933544 • Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19. • Cotton, M. (2014). Ethics and technology assessment: A participatory approach. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45088-4 • Crockett, M. J. (2017). Moral outrage in the digital age. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(11), 769–771. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0213-3 • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row. • de Aldama, C. (2020). Cognitive enhancement or cognitive diminishing? Digital technologies and challenges for education from a situated perspective. Límite Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy & Psychology, 15, 21. • de Aldama, C., & Pozo, J. I. (2020). Do you want to learn physics? Please play angry birds (but with epistemic goals). Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(1), 3–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633118823160 • de Aldama, C., Martínez-Morán, M., García-Pérez, D., Aguirre, A., & González-Cuevas, G. (2020, October 28–30). If more technology (p)➔ better reasoning (q)? Understanding technology and deductive reasoning from the Extended Mind perspective [Conference session]. In 8th international congress of educational sciences and development, Pontevedra (Spain). https://www.educationcongress8.com/ • De Freitas, S. (2018). Are games effective learning tools? A review of educational games. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(2), 74–84. • De Pablos Pons, J. (2010). Higher education and the knowledge society. Information and digital competencies. Revista de Universidad y Sociedad Del Conocimiento, 7(2), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.7238/rusc.v7i2.977 • Duclos, J. Y., Esteban, J., & Ray, D. (2004). Polarization: Concepts, measurement, estimation. Econometrica, 72(6), 1737–1772. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2004.00552.x • Eppler, M. J., & Mengis, J. (2004). The concept of information overload: A review of literature from organization science, accounting, marketing, MIS, and related disciplines. The Information Society, 20, 325–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240490507974 • European Commission. (2014). Responsible research and innovation. Europe’s ability to respond to societal challenges. • Evans, J. S. B. (1989). Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. • Evans, J. S. B., & Frankish, K. E. (2009). In two minds: Dual processes and beyond. Oxford University Press. • Evans, J. S. B., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3), 223–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612460685 • Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(S1), 298–320. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw006 • Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1257/089533005775196732 • Frith, J., & Kalin, J. (2016). Here, I used to be: Mobile media and practices of place-based digital memory. Space and Culture, 19(1), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/1206331215595730 • Froschauer, J., Merkl, D., Arends, M., & Goldfarb, D. (2013). Art history concepts at play with ThIATRO. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage, 6(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/2460376.2460378 • Garzón, J., & Acevedo, J. (2019). Meta-analysis of the impact of augmented reality on students’ learning gains. Educational Research Review, 27, 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.04.001 • Gigerenzer, G. (2007). Gut feelings: The intelligence of the unconscious. Viking. • González-Labra, M. J. (Ed.). (2019). Psicología del pensamiento. Sainz y Torres. • Govier, T. (2014). A practical study of argument (7th ed.). Cengage Learning. • Graafland, M., Schraagen, J. M., & Schijven, M. P. (2012). Systematic review of serious games for medical education and surgical skills training. Journal of British Surgery, 99(10), 1322–1330. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.8819 • Hilbert, M. (2020). Digital technology and social change: The digital transformation of society from ahistorical perspective. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 22(2), 194. https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.2/MHILBERT • Hilbert, M., & López, P. (2011). The world’s technological capacity to store, communicate, and compute information. Science, 332(6025), 60–65. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.1200970 • Holyoak, K. J., & Morrison, R. G. (Eds.). (2005). The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning. Cambridge University Press. • Hoskins, A. (2009). Digital network memory. In A. Erll & A. Rigney (Eds.), Mediation, remediation, and the dynamics of cultural memory (pp. 91–106). de Gruyter. • Jeong, S. H., & Hwang, Y. (2016). Media multitasking effects on cognitive vs. attitudinal outcomes: A meta-analysis. Human Communication Research, 42(4), 599–618. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12089 • Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Prentice Hall. • Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Strauss, Giroux. • Kokoç, M., Ilgaz, H., & Akçay, A. (2021). How deeply does media and technology usage affect the sustained attention? International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 1–12. • Kuhn, D. (2019). Critical thinking as discourse. Human Development, 62(3), 146–164. https://doi.org/10.1159/000500171 • Kushlev, K., & Dunn, E. W. (2015). Checking email less frequently reduces stress. Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 220–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHB.2014.11.005 • Lazer, D. M. J., Baum, M. A., Benkler, Y., Berinsky, A. J., Greenhill, K. M., Menczer, F., Metzger, M. J., Nyhan, B., Pennycook, G., Rothschild, D., Schudson, M., Sloman, S. A., Sunstein, C. R., Thorson, E. A., Watts, D. J., & Zittrain, J. L. (2018). The science of fake news: Addressing fake news requires a multidisciplinary effort. Science, 359(6380), 1094–1096. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.AAO2998 • Lee, J., Cho, B., Kim, Y., & Noh, J. (2015). Smartphone addiction in university students and its implication for learning. In Emerging issues in smart learning (pp. 297–305). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. • Liu, W., Tan, L., Huang, D., Chen, N., & Liu, F. (2021). When preschoolers use tablets: The effect of educational serious games on Children’s attention development. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 37(3), 234–248. • Lyons, B. A. (2020). From code to discourse: Social media and linkage mechanisms in deliberative systems. Journal of Deliberative Democracy, 13(1), 10.16997/JDD.270. • Mahrt, M. (2020). Why we find little evidence of digital fragmentation, but should not stop researching it. In V. Gehray, A. Waldherr, & A. Scholl (Eds.), Integration durch Kommunikation (pp. 27–35). Jahrbuch der Publizistik- und Kommunikationswissenschaft. • Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6 • Medeiros-Ward, N., Watson, J. M., & Strayer, D. L. (2015). On supertaskers and the neural basis of efficient multitasking. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(3), 876–883. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0713-3 • Miller, G. A. (1956). The magic number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 91–97. • Miri, B., David, B. C., & Uri, Z. (2007). Purposely teaching for the promotion of higher-order thinking skills: A case of critical thinking. Research in Science Education, 37(4), 353–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9029-2 • Mosleh, M., Pennycook, G., Arechar, A. A., & Rand, D. G. (2021). Cognitive reflection correlates with behavior on twitter. Nature Communications, 12(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20043-0 • Mozilla Foundation. (2021). YouTube regrets. https://foundation.mozilla.org/es/campaigns/regrets-reporter/findings/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2021advocacy-es&utm_content=regretsfindingsES • Mynatt, C. R., Doherty, M. E., & Tweney, R. D. (1977). Confirmation bias in a simulated research environment: An experimental study of scientific inference. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29(1), 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335557743000053 • Näsi, M., & Koivusilta, L. (2013). Internet and everyday life: The perceived implications of internet use on memory and ability to concentrate. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 16(2), 88–93. • Nisbett, R., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Prentice Hall. • O’Neil, C. (2017). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Penguin Books. • Ophir, E., Nass, C., & Wagner, A. D. (2009). Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(37), 15583–15587. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903620106 • Özkul, D., & Humphreys, L. (2015). Record and remember: Memory and meaning-making practices through mobile media. Mobile Media & Communication, 3(3), 351–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157914565846 • Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2005). A guide for educators to critical thinking competency standards. Foundation for critical thinking. • Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2021). The psychology of fake news. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25(5), 388–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.02.007 • Peters, M. A. (2017). Education in a post-truth world. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49, 563–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2016.1264114 • Pinker, S. (1997). How the mind works. W. W. Norton. • Robertson, R. E., Jiang, S., Joseph, K., Friedland, L., Lazer, D., & Wilson, C. (2018). Auditing partisan audience bias within Google search. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 2(CSCW), 22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274417 • Rowlands, M. (2009). Extended cognition and the mark of the cognitive. Philosophical Psychology, 22(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515080802703620 • Schnabel, T., Amershi, S., Bennett, P. N., Bailey, P., & Joachims, T. (2020, July). The impact of more transparent interfaces on behavior in personalized recommendation. In Proceedings of the 43rd international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 991–1000). • Shulman, E. P., Smith, A. R., Silva, K., Icenogle, G., Duell, N., Chein, J., & Steinberg, L. (2016). The dual systems model: Review, reappraisal, and reaffirmation. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 103–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2015.12.010 • Sparrow, B., Liu, J., & Wegner, D. M. (2011). Google effects on memory: Cognitive consequences of having information at our fingertips. Science, 333(6043), 776–778. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1207745 • Stothart, C., Mitchum, A., & Yehnert, C. (2015). The attentional cost of receiving a cell phone notification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41(4), 893. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000100 • Styles, E. (2006). The psychology of attention. Psychology Press. • Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5 • Talan, T. (2020). The effect of mobile learning on learning performance: A meta-analysis study. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 20(1), 79–103. • Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2011). The cognitive reflection test as a predictor of performance on heuristics-and-biases tasks. Memory & Cognition, 39(7), 1275–1289. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-011-0104-1 • Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2014). Assessing miserly information processing: An expansion of the cognitive reflection test. Thinking & Reasoning, 20(2), 147–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2013.844729 • Trisolini, D. C., Petilli, M. A., & Daini, R. (2018). Is action video gaming related to sustained attention of adolescents? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(5), 1033–1039. • Tun, P. A., & Lachman, M. E. (2010). The association between computer use and cognition across adulthood: Use it so you won’t lose it? Psychology and Aging, 25(3), 560. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019543 • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 207–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983). Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review, 90(4), 293. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.90.4.293 • U.S. Department of Labor. (2020). National census of fatal occupational injuries in 2019. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf • Uncapher, M. R., & Wagner, A. D. (2018). Minds and brains of media multitaskers: Current findings and future directions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(40), 9889–9896. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1611612115 • Uncapher, M. R., Thieu, M. K., & Wagner, A. D. (2016). Media multitasking and memory: Differences in working memory and long-term memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, 483–490. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0907-3 • Van Gog, T., Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory: Advances in research on worked examples, animations, and cognitive load measurement. Educational Psychology Review, 22(4), 375–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9145-4 • Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.AAP9559 • Vraga, E. K., & Bode, L. (2017). I do not believe you: How providing a source corrects health misperceptions across social media platforms. Information, Communication & Society, 21(10), 1337–1353. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1313883 • Vujic, A. (2017). Switching on or switching off? Everyday computer use as a predictor of sustained attention and cognitive reflection. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 152–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.040 • Ward, A. F., Duke, K., Gneezy, A., & Bos, M. W. (2017). Brain drain: The mere presence of one’s own smartphone reduces available cognitive capacity. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 2(2), 140–154. https://doi.org/10.1086/691462 • Wason, P. C. (1960). On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12(3), 129–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470216008416717 • Wilmer, H. H., Sherman, L. E., & Chein, J. M. (2017). Smartphones and cognition: A review of research exploring the links between mobile technology habits and cognitive functioning. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 605. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00605 • Wright, D. (2010). A framework for the ethical impact assessment of information technology. Ethics and Information Technology, 13(3), 199–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10676-010-9242-6 • Ziegler, D. A., Simon, A. J., Gallen, C. L., Skinner, S., Janowich, J. R., Volponi, J. J., Rolle, C. E., Mishra, J., Kornfield, J., Anguera, J. A., & Gazzaley, A. (2019). Closed-loop digital meditation improves sustained attention in young adults. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(7), 746–757. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0611-9The ever-evolving digital technology is transforming us in unexpected ways. In the last few decades, almost any dimension of human life is being affected by these devices, from a global perspective (e.g., we can video chat immediately with someone being thousands of kilometers away) to the individual cognitive sphere. For instance, we no longer memorize telephone numbers or instructions to get to a given place; we just trust these artifacts and let them perform more and more actions we used to do by ourselves in the past. This new reality poses profound implications for human nature, particularly for cognitive architecture. There is a growing body of scientific literature highlighting the effects of digital technology over cognitive processes, such as attention, memory, or motivation. However, there is little evidence regarding to what extent technology is related with thinking and reasoning. Is the use of technology enhancing the way we think and reason, and thus making us smarter? Or is it the opposite, and they are taking away from us the cognitive effort we used to conduct ourselves, and thus making us cognitive lazier and brainless. Throughout this chapter, three goals are aimed, namely, (a) depicting the state of the art of the studies regarding the relationship between digital technology and cognition, especially possible changes in the way we think and reason; (b) reflecting about the future envisioned concerning how technology should be aligned with social needs (rather than social needs being deceived to meet the interests of giant companies behind technology design). In doing so, the normative way of thinking and reasoning will be discussed, that is, what is considered the right way to deploy them. Finally, (c) drawing some lines of action to raise awareness. Instead of waiting for a better technological design, specific actions at an individual level to take back control over technology can already be conducted. Social change is happening, it depends on us whether it will be the social change we wish, desire, and deserve, or not.Depto. de Investigación y Psicología en EducaciónFac. de EducaciónTRUEpu