Implicit spatial-numerical associations: Negative numbers and the role of counting direction.

Fischer, Martin H.; Shaki, Samuel

doi:10.1037/xhp0000369

Cited by 25 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(A) Average RTs (with SE) to Small magnitude (1,2) and Large magnitude (8,9) providing Go response to a specific numerical magnitude, smaller or larger than 5, produced no RTs advantage in the detection of arrow-targets that were oriented toward the same position that numbers would putatively occupy on a left-to-right oriented MNL. These results provide a clear response to the first problem that we wished to address in the present study and strongly suggest, in agreement with our original theoretical proposal (Aiello et al, 2012;Fattorini et al, 2015;2016), that congruency space-number effects like those described in Fischer and Shaki (2017) depend, as in the case of the SNARC effect, on the concomitant use spatial and numerical codes in the instructions that regulate the performance of Go/NoGo responses rather than on an inherent association between space and number magnitude codes.…”

Section: Figure 3 Experimentssupporting

confidence: 90%

“…These findings provide support to the hypothesis first advanced in Aiello et al (2012) and re-proposed in Fattorini et al (2015;2016) that the representation of number magnitudes has no inherent left-to-right spatial organization and that this organization is rather temporarily elicited by the use of left/right spatial codes, whether linked to number stimuli through response selection or directly conceptually associated to the same stimuli in the task at hand. In line with our original proposal, Fischer and Shaki (2017) have recently showed that when left/right spatial codes are associated with magnitude codes in the instructions that regulate the release of unimanual Go responses to intermixed numerical targets and pictorial shape-targets pointing to the left or to the right, reaction times (RTs) are faster when in task instructions spatial codes are congruent with the position that numerical targets would occupy on a horizontally oriented MNL. Therefore, an instruction like "push when the number is lower than 5 or the shape points to the left" produces faster RTs than an instruction like "push when the number is lower than 5 or the shape points to the right".…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 71%

“…All participants showed left-to-right scanning in the inspection of linear arrays of four cardboard circles (Fischer and Shaki, 2017). On finger counting test (Lindemann et al, 2011) 11 participants showed left-to-right and 13 right-to-left preference.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…It is important to note that the evaluation of individual finger counting style direction (Lindemann et al, 2011) demonstrated that, in all experiments, space-number congruency effects were absent both in participants who counted from left-to-right and in those who counted from right-to-left. In addition, all participants showed a left-to-right preference in the sequential visual inspection and pointing of visual items organised in a horizontal row (Fischer and Shaki, 2017).…”

Section: Figure 3 Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…All participants were right-handed and at the end of experimental sessions were administered with two tasks that tested their counting direction preference. In a first task (Fischer and Shaki, 2017), four identical black cardboard circles with a diameter of 4 cm were presented equally spaced in a linear array on a blank A4 piece of paper that was positioned in landscape format with its centre aligned to the head-body midsagittal plane of participants. Each participant was asked to "count these circles aloud and touch each circle while counting."…”

Section: Apparatusmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Reconstructing the origins of the space-number association: spatial and number-magnitude codes must be used jointly to elicit spatially organised mental number lines

Pinto

Pellegrino

Marson

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a series of recent studies we have pointed out that the use of contrasting left/right spatial codes, whether indirectly related to number magnitudes through response selection or directly associated to the same magnitudes to guide their spatial positioning on a mental number line, is crucial in eliciting space-number associations (Aiello, 2012;Fattorini et al., 2015;2016;Pinto et al., 2018).Nonetheless, this conclusion is based on experiments in which spatial and number-magnitudes codes are used jointly during task performance. Here, in a series of unimanual Go/No-Go tasks with intermixed central numerical and pictorial targets, i.e. arrows pointing to the left or to the right, we explore whether spatial codes used in isolation inherently evoke the left-to-right representation of number magnitudes and, vice-versa, whether number-magnitude codes used in isolation inherently evoke the conceptual activation of left/right spatial codes. In a first series of experiments participants were asked to provide unimanual Go/N-Go responses based on instructions that activated only magnitude codes, e.g. "push only if the number is lower than 5 and whenever an arrow appears", or only spatial codes, e.g. "push only when an arrow points to the left and 2 whenever a number appears". In a second series of experiments, the same numerical instructions were combined with the request of responding only to arrows in a specific colour, e.g. "push when the number is lower than 5 and whenever a blue arrow appears". At variance with a recent experiment by Shaki and Fischer (2018), in our experiments no constant association was present between a specific arrow colour and a specific arrow direction. The results of these experiments highlight no space-number congruency effects: e.g. no faster RTs to arrows pointing to the left rather than to the right when participants attend to numbers lower than 5 and, vice-versa, no faster RTs to numbers lower than 5 rather than higher, when participants attend to arrows pointing to the left. Based on these findings it must be concluded that neither space codes used in isolation can elicit a spatial representation of number magnitudes nor number-magnitude codes used in isolation can trigger the activation of spatial codes. Thus, spatial and numerical codes must be used jointly to evoke spatially organised mental number lines.

show abstract

Section: Figure 3 Experimentssupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 71%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Figure 3 Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Apparatusmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Reconstructing the origins of the space-number association: spatial and number-magnitude codes must be used jointly to elicit spatially organised mental number lines

Pinto

Pellegrino

Marson

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Attentional-SNARC effect 16 years later: no automatic space–number association (taking into account finger counting style, imagery vividness, and learning style in 174 participants)

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perceiving numerosity does not cause automatic shifts of spatial attention

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is debated whether the representation of numbers is endowed with a directional-spatial component so that perceiving small-magnitude numbers triggers leftward shifts of attention and perceiving large-magnitude numbers rightward shifts. Contrary to initial findings, recent investigations have demonstrated that centrally presented small-magnitude and large-magnitude Arabic numbers do not cause leftward and rightward shifts of attention, respectively. Here we verified whether perceiving small or large non-symbolic numerosities (i.e., clouds of dots) drives attention to the left or the right side of space, respectively. In experiment 1, participants were presented with central small (1, 2) vs large-numerosity (8, 9) clouds of dots followed by an imperative target in the left or right side of space. In experiment 2, a central cloud of dots (i.e., five dots) was followed by the simultaneous presentation of two identical dot-clouds, one on the left and one on the right side of space. Lateral clouds were both lower (1, 2) or higher in numerosity (8, 9) than the central cloud. After a variable delay, one of the two lateral clouds turned red and participants had to signal the colour change through a unimanual response. We found that (a) in Experiment 1, the small vs large numerosity of the central cloud of dots did not speed up the detection of left vs right targets, respectively, (b) in Experiment 2, the detection of colour change was not faster in the left side of space when lateral clouds were smaller in numerosity than the central reference and in the right side when clouds were larger in numerosity. These findings show that perceiving non-symbolic numerosity does not cause automatic shifts of spatial attention and suggests no inherent association between the representation of numerosity and that of directional space.

show abstract

Implicit spatial-numerical associations: Negative numbers and the role of counting direction.

Cited by 25 publications

References 19 publications

Reconstructing the origins of the space-number association: spatial and number-magnitude codes must be used jointly to elicit spatially organised mental number lines

Reconstructing the origins of the space-number association: spatial and number-magnitude codes must be used jointly to elicit spatially organised mental number lines

The Attentional-SNARC effect 16 years later: no automatic space–number association (taking into account finger counting style, imagery vividness, and learning style in 174 participants)

Perceiving numerosity does not cause automatic shifts of spatial attention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About