Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Petia Kojouharova and Attila Krajcsi have contributed equally to this work.
In the number comparison task distance effect (better performance with larger distance between the two numbers) and size effect (better performance with smaller numbers) are used extensively to find the representation underlying numerical cognition. According to the dominant analog number system (ANS) explanation, both effects depend on the extent of the overlap between the noisy representations of the two values. An alternative discrete semantic system (DSS) account supposes that the distance effect is rooted in the association between the numbers and the “small–large” properties with better performance for numbers with relatively high differences in their strength of association, and that the size effect depends on the everyday frequency of the numbers with smaller numbers being more frequent and thus easier to process. A recent study demonstrated that in a new, artificial digit notation—where both association and frequency can be arbitrarily manipulated—the distance and size effects change according to the DSS account. Here, we investigate whether the same manipulations modify the distance and size effects in Indo-Arabic notation, for which associations and frequency are already well established. We found that the distance effect depends on the association between the numbers and the “small–large” responses. It was also found that while the distance effect is flexible, the size effect seems to be unaltered, revealing a dissociation between the two effects. This result challenges the ANS view, which supposes a single mechanism behind the distance and size effects, and supports the DSS account, supposing two independent, statistics-based mechanisms behind the two effects.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Dehaene, S. (2007). Symbols and quantities in parietal cortex: Elements of a mathematical theory of number representation and manipulation. In P. Haggard, Y. Rossetti & M. Kawato (Eds.), Sensorimotor foundations of higher cognition (Vol. XXII, pp. 527–574). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(3), 371–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3418.104.22.1681. CrossRef
Fischer, M. H., Mills, R. A., & Shaki, S. (2010). How to cook a SNARC: Number placement in text rapidly changes spatial–numerical associations. Brain and Cognition, 72(3), 333–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2009.10.010. CrossRefPubMed
Goffin, C., & Ansari, D. (2016). Beyond magnitude: Judging ordinality of symbolic number is unrelated to magnitude comparison and independently relates to individual differences in arithmetic. Cognition, 150, 68–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.01.018. CrossRefPubMed
Krajcsi, A. (2016). Numerical distance and size effects dissociate in Indo-Arabic number comparison. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1175-6.
Leibovich, T., & Ansari, D. (2016). The symbol-grounding problem in numerical cognition: A review of theory, evidence, and outstanding questions. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 70(1), 12–23. https://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000070. CrossRefPubMed
Lyons, I. M., Nuerk, H.-C., & Ansari, D. (2015). Rethinking the implications of numerical ratio effects for understanding the development of representational precision and numerical processing across formats. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(5), 1021–1035. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000094. CrossRef
Lyons, I. M., Vogel, S. E., & Ansari, D. (2016). On the ordinality of numbers. In Progress in brain research (Vol. 227, pp. 187–221). Amsterdam: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.pbr.2016.04.010.
Peirce, J. W. (2007). PsychoPy—Psychophysics software in Python. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 162(1–2), 8–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2006.11.017. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Ratcliff, R., & McKoon, G. (2008). The diffusion decision model: Theory and data for two-choice decision tasks. Neural Computation, 20(4), 873–922. https://doi.org/10.1162/neco.2008.12-06-420. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Reynvoet, B., & Sasanguie, D. (2016). The symbol grounding problem revisited: A thorough evaluation of the ANS mapping account and the proposal of an alternative account based on symbol–symbol associations. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01581.
Sasanguie, D., Göbel, S. M., Moll, K., Smets, K., & Reynvoet, B. (2013). Approximate number sense, symbolic number processing, or number–space mappings: What underlies mathematics achievement? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 114(3), 418–431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.10.012. CrossRefPubMed
Schneider, M., Beeres, K., Coban, L., Merz, S., Susan Schmidt, S., Stricker, J., & De Smedt, B. (2017). Associations of non-symbolic and symbolic numerical magnitude processing with mathematical competence: A meta-analysis. Developmental Science, 20(3), e12372. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12372. CrossRef
Smith, P. L., & Ratcliff, R. (2004). Psychology and neurobiology of simple decisions. Trends in Neurosciences, 27(3), 161–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2004.01.006. CrossRefPubMed
- The Indo-Arabic distance effect originates in the response statistics of the task
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
An International Journal of Perception, Attention, Memory, and Action
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772