Shared and distinct neural circuitry for nonsymbolic and symbolic double‐digit addition

Abstract

Symbolic arithmetic is a complex, uniquely human ability that is acquired through direct instruction. In contrast, the capacity to mentally add and subtract nonsymbolic quantities such as dot arrays emerges without instruction and can be seen in human infants and nonhuman animals. One possibility is that the mental manipulation of nonsymbolic arrays provides a critical scaffold for developing symbolic arithmetic abilities. To explore this hypothesis, we examined whether there is a shared neural basis for nonsymbolic and symbolic double‐digit addition. In parallel, we asked whether there are brain regions that are associated with nonsymbolic and symbolic addition independently. First, relative to visually matched control tasks, we found that both nonsymbolic and symbolic addition elicited greater neural signal in the bilateral intraparietal sulcus (IPS), bilateral inferior temporal gyrus, and the right superior parietal lobule. Subsequent representational similarity analyses revealed that the neural similarity between nonsymbolic and symbolic addition was stronger relative to the similarity between each addition condition and its visually matched control task, but only in the bilateral IPS. These findings suggest that the IPS is involved in arithmetic calculation independent of stimulus format.

Hemispheric specialization in spatial versus ordinal processing in the day‐old domestic chick (Gallus gallus)

“…This shows that the spatial and ordinal information acquired during binocular training can be correctly represented and independently used by each hemisphere, though with a different anchor end that identifies the starting point for “counting.” This anchoring has also been reported when both spatial and ordinal cues were available in the frontoparallel test 16 . The bilateral hemispheric representation of numerical processing found here is consistent with the literature 45,46 . Overall, these findings enlarge our knowledge on the left‐to‐right–oriented bias previously reported in birds 11 and nonhuman primates 20 .…”

“…16 The bilateral hemispheric representation of numerical processing found here is consistent with the literature. 45,46 Overall, these findings enlarge our knowledge on the left-to-right-oriented bias previously reported in birds 11 and nonhuman primates. 20 Here, we show that both hemispheres encode and use spatial and ordinal cues to find a food source.…”

Neural Processing Mechanism of Mental Calculation Based on Cerebral Oscillatory Changes: A Comparison Between Abacus Experts and Novices

“…We could propose calculation processing in both abacus expert and non-experts based on our new findings and some previous studies (Hanakawa et al, 2002(Hanakawa et al, , 2003Arsalidou and Taylor, 2011;Tanaka et al, 2012;Pinel and Dehaene, 2013;Amalric and Dehaene, 2017). In non-experts, from 75 ms visual processing of presented numbers start in the bilateral medial occipital, then from 150 ms figurative cognition of numbers in the inferior temporal Pinel et al, 1999) and numeric processing in the bilateral IPS Cohen et al, 2000;Rickard et al, 2000;Kazui et al, 2000;Bugden et al, 2019), from 200 ms inner speech in the left IFG , from 250 ms working memory in the DLPFC (Rickard et al, 2000), and finally from 400 ms addition with carrying in the IPS starts. Therefore, the calculation in non-experts is serial processing.…”

“…Also, the right DLPFC and bilateral IPS were explicitly detected in non-experts. Bilateral IPS is related to numerical processing (Bugden et al, 2019), while the right DLPFC is most probably related to working memory. In experts, bilateral POS, right IFG, and left sensorimotor areas were detected specifically.…”

The neural basis of number word processing in children and adults

“…IPS is activated during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) tasks across symbolic (i.e., “3” and “three”) and non-symbolic (i.e., three dots) representations of number (e.g. Arsalidou and Taylor, 2011 ; Bugden et al, 2019 ; Cohen Kadosh et al, 2007 ; Dehaene et al, 2003 ; Fias et al, 2003 ; Sokolowski et al, 2017 ).…”