Arithmetic split effects reflect strategy selection: an adult age comparative study in addition comparison and verification tasks.

We tested whether split effects in arithmetic (i.e., better performance on large-split problems, like 3 + 8 = 16, than on small-split problems, like 3 + 8 = 12) reflect decision processing or strategy selection. To achieve this end, we tested performance of younger and older adults, matched on arithmetic skills, on two arithmetic tasks: the addition/number comparison task (e.g., 4 + 8, 13; which item is the larger?) and in the inequality verification task (e.g., 4 + 8 < 13; Yes/No?). In both tasks, split between additions and proposed numbers were manipulated. We also manipulated the difficulty of the additions, which represents an index of arithmetic fact calculation (i.e., hard problems, like 6 + 8 < 15, are solved more slowly than easy problems, like 2 + 4 < 07, suggesting that calculation takes longer). Analyses of latencies revealed three main results: First, split effects were of smaller magnitude in older adults compared to younger adults, whatever the type of arithmetic task; second, split effects were of smaller magnitude on easy problems; and third, calculation processes were well maintained in older adults with high level of arithmetic skills. This set of results improves our understanding of cognitive aging and strategy selection in arithmetic.