TabTabTab
Are times tables math or memory?
Most parents think of times tables as a math problem. Brain research says otherwise, and that changes how children should practice and how fast they can improve.
What the research says
Research by Dehaene & Cohen (1997) proposed the “triple-code model” of arithmetic: recalling times tables activates the language areas of the brain, the same ones we use to remember words, phrases and sequences. These are different from the areas used for mathematical reasoning, which switch on when we calculate but not when we recall automatically. A later study by Dehaene and colleagues, published in Science (1999), confirmed that exact arithmetic, times tables included, is learned tied to a language and transfers poorly to another one. Reasoning about approximate quantities, by contrast, doesn’t depend on language.
A 2024 study by Cerda and colleagues added more evidence: in bilingual adults, the simpler multiplication facts activated left temporal and frontal areas linked to verbal memory, the language areas rather than the math ones. More broadly, research on arithmetic in bilinguals shows that multiplication facts are remembered best in the language they were learned in: more confirmation that they’re memories made of words.
What this means in practice
Treating times tables as a problem to solve, or teaching them only through reasoning, ignores how the brain actually stores them. Methods that use verbal memory, like saying answers out loud and remembering them instead of working them out, work better precisely because they follow the way the brain memorizes them.
Try this
- Encourage your child to say the whole fact out loud, “six times eight, forty-eight”, not just the answer. It strengthens the verbal memory.
- Don’t worry if your child can’t explain how they know an answer. Remembering automatically is different from calculating, and that’s exactly the goal.
- If your child switches languages while answering, the memory lives in their stronger language. Consider practicing in both.
Sources
- Dehaene & Cohen (1997) — peer-reviewed study
- Dehaene et al. (1999) — peer-reviewed study
- Cerda et al. (2024) — peer-reviewed study
Last reviewed: 2026-08-01