Assessment & Research

Cognitive subtypes of mathematics learning difficulties in primary education.

Bartelet et al. (2014) · Research in developmental disabilities 2014
★ The Verdict

Kids with math learning disabilities fall into six cognitive camps—match your teaching to the camp, not the label.

✓ Read this if BCBAs doing academic assessments in elementary schools.
✗ Skip if Clinicians who only handle severe problem behavior with no academic component.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

The team looked at 226 children who struggle with math. They gave each child a full battery of thinking tests. Then they let the data sort itself into groups to see how many math-problem profiles popped out.

02

What they found

Six clear cognitive subtypes appeared. Some kids had weak memory, others slow processing, and some mixed problems. The big message: math learning disability is not one thing—it's six.

03

How this fits with other research

Iglesias-Sarmiento et al. (2017) extend this picture. They show that when ADHD rides along, executive-function tests—not the memory tests—explain the math gaps.

Ceruti et al. (2025) widen the lens. They find the same data-driven subtypes across all learning disorders, not just math. Their top predictors are executive-function scores, matching the ADHD pattern.

Belacchi et al. (2014) seem to disagree at first. They say IQ level does not matter; both low-IQ and average-IQ math-weak kids show the same number-sense problems. Dimona answers: IQ is not the splitter—the six cognitive profiles are. Once you sort by profile, IQ stops being useful.

04

Why it matters

Stop treating every math-struggling learner the same way. Run brief tests for memory span, processing speed, and executive function. Pick the intervention that fixes the weak link you see, not the label on the file. Monday, swap your generic math drill for a targeted one that matches the kid’s profile.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Give a 5-minute working-memory screener; if it’s low, swap in fact-flash cards plus verbal rehearsal instead of plain worksheets.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
other
Sample size
226
Population
other
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

It has been asserted that children with mathematics learning difficulties (MLD) constitute a heterogeneous group. To date, most researchers have investigated differences between predefined MLD subtypes. Specifically MLD children are frequently categorized a priori into groups based on the presence or absence of an additional disorder, such as a reading disorder, to examine cognitive differences between MLD subtypes. In the current study 226 third to six grade children (M age=131 months) with MLD completed a selection of number specific and general cognitive measures. The data driven approach was used to identify the extent to which performance of the MLD children on these measures could be clustered into distinct groups. In particular, after conducting a factor analysis, a 200 times repeated K-means clustering approach was used to classify the children's performance. Results revealed six distinguishable clusters of MLD children, specifically (a) a weak mental number line group, (b) weak ANS group, (c) spatial difficulties group, (d) access deficit group, (e) no numerical cognitive deficit group and (f) a garden-variety group. These findings imply that different cognitive subtypes of MLD exist and that these can be derived from data-driven approaches to classification. These findings strengthen the notion that MLD is a heterogeneous disorder, which has implications for the way in which intervention may be tailored for individuals within the different subtypes.

Research in developmental disabilities, 2014 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2013.12.010