Abstract
The mental representation of numbers along a line oriented left to right affects spatial cognition, facilitating responses in the ipsilateral hemispace (the spatial-numerical association of response codes [SNARC] effect). We investigated whether the number/space association is the result of an attentional shift or response selection. Previous research has often introduced covert left/right response cues by presenting targets to the left or the right. The present study avoided left/right cues by requiring forced choice upper/lower luminance discriminations to two mirror-reversed luminance gradients (the grayscale task). The grayscale stimuli were overlaid with strings of (1) low numbers, (2) high numbers, and (3) nonnumerical characters. In Experiment 1, 20 dextrals judged the number’s magnitude and then indicated whether the upper/lower grayscale was darker. Results showed leftward and rightward attentional biases for low and high numbers, respectively. Demands to process numbers along a left/right line were made less explicit in Experiment 2 (N=8 dextrals), using (1) a parity judgment and (2) arbitrary linguistic labels for top/bottom. Once again, a spatial congruency effect was observed. Because the response (up/down) was orthogonal to the dimension of interest (left/right), the effect of number cannot be attributed to late-stage response congruencies. This study required unspeeded responses to stimuli presented in free vision, whereas other experiments have used speeded responses. Understanding the time course of number-space effects may, therefore, be important to the debate associated with response selection.
References
Bauer, D. W., & Miller, J. (1982). Stimulus-response compatibility and the motor system. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 34A, 367–380.
Bowers, D., & Heilman, K. M. (1980). Pseudoneglect: Effects of hemispace on a tactile line bisection task. Neuropsychologia, 18, 491–498.
Calabria, M., & Rossetti, Y. (2005). Interference between number processing and line bisection: A methodology. Neuropsychologia, 43, 779–783.
Casarotti, M., Michielin, M., Zorzi, M., & Umiltà, C. (2007). Temporal order judgements reveal how number magnitude affects visuospatial attention. Cognition, 102, 101–117.
Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 371–396.
Fischer, M. H. (2001). Number processing induces spatial performance biases. Neurology, 57, 822–826.
Fischer, M. H., Castel, A. D., Dodd, M. D., & Pratt, J. (2003). Perceiving numbers causes shifts of attention. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 555–556.
Galfano, G., Rusconi, E., & Umiltà, C. (2006). Number magnitude orients attention, but not against one’s will. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 869–874.
Gevers, W., Lammertyn, J., Notebaert, W., Verguts, T., & Fias, W. (2006). Automatic response activation of implicit spatial information: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Acta Psychologica, 122, 221–233.
Gevers, W., Reynvoet, B., & Fias, W. (2003). The mental representation of sequences is spatially organized. Cognition, 87, 87–95.
Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). A theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 24, 849–937.
Ito, Y., & Hatta, T. (2004). Spatial structure of quantitative representation of numbers: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Memory & Cognition, 32, 662–673.
Jewell, G., & McCourt, M. E. (2000). Pseudoneglect: A review and meta-analysis of performance factors in line bisection tasks. Neuropsychologia, 38, 93–110.
Kennett, S., Martin, E., Spence, C., & Driver, J. (2001). Tactile-visual links in exogenous spatial attention under different postures: Convergent evidence from psychophysics and ERPs. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13, 462–478.
Keus, I. M., Jenks, K. M., & Schwarz, W. (2005). Psychophysical evidence that the SNARC effect has its functional locus in the response selection stage. Cognitive Brain Research, 24, 48–56.
Keus, I. M., & Schwarz, W. (2005). Searching for the functional locus of the SNARC effect: Evidence for a response-related origin. Memory & Cognition, 33, 681–695.
Mapelli, D., Rusconi, E., & Umiltà, C. (2003). The SNARC effect: An instance of the Simon effect? Cognition, 88, B1-B10.
Mattingley, J. B., Berberovic, N., Corben, L., Slavin, M. J., Nicholls, M. E. R., & Bradshaw, J. L. (2004). The greyscales task: A perceptual measure of attentional bias following unilateral hemispheric damage. Neuropsychologia, 42, 387–394.
McCourt, M. E. (2001). Performance consistency of normal observers in forced-choice tachistoscopic visual line bisection. Neuropsychologia, 39, 1065–1076.
McCourt, M. E., & Jewell, G. (1999). Visuospatial attention in line bisection: Stimulus modulation of pseudoneglect. Neuropsychologia, 37, 843–855.
Nicholls, M. E. R., Bradshaw, J. L., & Mattingley, J. B. (1999). Free-viewing perceptual asymmetries for the judgement of shade, numerosity and size. Neuropsychologia, 37, 307–314.
Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97–133.
Proctor, R. W., & Cho, Y. S. (2006). Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 416–442.
Ristic, J., Wright, A., & Kingstone, A. (2006). The number line effect reflects top-down control. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 862–868.
Schwarz, W., & Keus, I. M. (2004). Moving the eyes along the mental number line: Comparing SNARC effects with saccadic and manual responses. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 651–664.
Stoianov, I., Kramer, P., Umiltà, C., & Zorzi, M. (2008). Visuospatial priming of the mental number line. Cognition, 106, 770–779.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nicholls, M.E.R., Loftus, A.M. & Gevers, W. Look, no hands: A perceptual task shows that number magnitude induces shifts of attention. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 15, 413–418 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.2.413
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.2.413