The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A componential view of children's difficulties in learning fractions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00715 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Florence Gabriel, Frédéric Coché, Dénes Szucs, Vincent Carette, Bernard Rey, Alain Content |
| Abstract |
Fractions are well known to be difficult to learn. Various hypotheses have been proposed in order to explain those difficulties: fractions can denote different concepts; their understanding requires a conceptual reorganization with regard to natural numbers; and using fractions involves the articulation of conceptual knowledge with complex manipulation of procedures. In order to encompass the major aspects of knowledge about fractions, we propose to distinguish between conceptual and procedural knowledge. We designed a test aimed at assessing the main components of fraction knowledge. The test was carried out by fourth-, fifth- and sixth-graders from the French Community of Belgium. The results showed large differences between categories. Pupils seemed to master the part-whole concept, whereas numbers and operations posed problems. Moreover, pupils seemed to apply procedures they do not fully understand. Our results offer further directions to explain why fractions are amongst the most difficult mathematical topics in primary education. This study offers a number of recommendations on how to teach fractions. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 175 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 174 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 10% |
| Researcher | 13 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 36 | 21% |
| Unknown | 57 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mathematics | 43 | 25% |
| Psychology | 31 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 10% |
| Arts and Humanities | 6 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 6% |
| Unknown | 62 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 October 2013.
All research outputs
#16,967,884
of 24,943,708 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,818
of 33,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,579
of 292,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#716
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,943,708 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,669 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 292,957 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 969 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.