Number Versus Contour Length in Infants' Discrimination of Small Visual Sets

Abstract

This study examined infants' use of contour length in number discrimination tasks. We systematically varied number and contour length in a visual habituation experiment in order to separate these two variables. Sixteen 6-to 8-month-old infants were habituated to displays of either two or three black squares on a page. They were then tested with alternating displays of either a familiar number of squares with a novel contour length or a novel number of squares with a familiar contour length. Infants dishabituated to the display that changed in contour length, but not to the display that changed in number. We conclude that infants base their discriminations on contour length or some other continuous variable that correlates with it, rather than on number.

Exploring the impact of phonological awareness, visual–spatial working memory, and preschool quantity–number competencies on mathematics achievement in elementary school: Findings from a 3-year longitudinal study

“…As some researchers assume, this implies that infants can already differentiate between discrete quantities (see Antell & Keating, 1983;Bijeljac-Babic, Bertoncini, & Mehler, 1993;Huntley-Fenner & Cannon, 2000;Starkey & Cooper, 1980;Wynn, 1992; for large numerosities: Xu, Spelke, & Goddard, 2005). Others believe that infants only differentiate between the spatial extent of quantities but not between discrete amounts (see Clearfield & Mix, 1999Feigenson, Carey, & Spelke, 2002;Mix, Huttenlocher, & Levine, 1996Rousselle, Palmers, & Noël, 2004;Simon, Hespos, & Rochat, 1995; for small numerosities: Xu, Spelke, & Goddard, 2005). As indicated by the first level of the theoretical model, we assume that children are at least able to differentiate between indiscrete amounts (quantity discrimination).…”

Are numbers special? An overview of chronometric, neuroimaging, developmental and comparative studies of magnitude representation

“…For instance, infants habituated to a given numerosity (either 2 or 3) do not react to a change in numerosity when the total continuous extent of the display is held constant (Clearfield and Mix, 1999;Feigenson et al, 2002); rather, they react when the total continuous extent changes, even when numerosity stays constant. On the other hand, Brannon et al (2004) have applied the same paradigm to large numerosities and observed a reaction to numerosity but no reaction to the continuous extent, thus showing that numerosity is more salient than non-numerical quantities for arrays containing large number of items.…”

Evidence of the impact of visuo-spatial processing on magnitude representation in 22q11.2 microdeletion syndrome

“…density, sum of perimeter, surface area, length, size…) in children and adults (Dormal & Pesenti, 2007;Gebuis, Cohen Kadosh, de Haan, & Henik, 2009;Rousselle & Noël, 2008;Rousselle, Palmers, & Noël, 2004). Some studies even fail to find any evidence of a sensitivity to numerical differences when the perceptual variables, which naturally covary with numerosities, are strictly controlled for (Clearfield & Mix, 1999, 2001Feigenson, Carey, & Spelke, 2002;Mix, 2002;Rousselle et al, 2004). Actually, much behavioral and electrophysiological evidence suggests that numerical magnitude processing of large numerosities relies on the integration of multiple perceptual cues (Gebuis, Cohen Kadosh, & Gevers, 2016;Gebuis & Reynvoet, 2012a, 2012bHurewitz, Gelman, & Schnitzer, 2006).…”