Literature DB >> 19293103

Integers do not automatically activate their quantity representation.

Dale J Cohen1.   

Abstract

Researchers have generally come to the conclusion that integers automatically activate the quantity they symbolize and that this quantity dominates responding. I conducted a strong test of this hypothesis with two numerical same/different experiments. On each trial, I presented the participant an integer between 1 and 9 and asked him or her to identify whether that symbol was a 5. If quantity information dominates responding, participants' reaction times (RTs) should be a function of the numerical distance between the target and the distractor. If quantity information is not activated, the integer is merely a shape, and participants' RTs should be a function of the physical similarity of the target and the distractor. The data from Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrate that quantity information exerts no control and that physical similarity is the primary controlling factor. These findings demonstrate that integers maintain a level of independence from their quantity representations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19293103      PMCID: PMC2658745          DOI: 10.3758/PBR.16.2.332

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  15 in total

1.  The p-value fallacy and how to avoid it.

Authors:  Peter Dixon
Journal:  Can J Exp Psychol       Date:  2003-09

2.  Is numerical comparison digital? Analogical and symbolic effects in two-digit number comparison.

Authors:  S Dehaene; E Dupoux; J Mehler
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 3.332

3.  The psychophysics of numerical comparison: a reexamination of apparently incompatible data.

Authors:  S Dehaene
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1989-06

4.  Evidence and scientific research.

Authors:  S N Goodman; R Royall
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  Comparisons of digits and dot patterns.

Authors:  P B Buckley; C B Gillman
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1974-12

6.  Isolating the effects of symbolic distance and semantic congruity in comparative judgments: an additive-factors analysis.

Authors:  E M Duncan; C E McFarland
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1980-11

7.  Numerical judgments with Kanji and Kana.

Authors:  A Takahashi; D Green
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 3.139

8.  Is three greater than five: the relation between physical and semantic size in comparison tasks.

Authors:  A Henik; J Tzelgov
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1982-07

9.  Attention, automaticity, and levels of representation in number processing.

Authors:  S Dehaene; R Akhavein
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 3.051

10.  Across-notation automatic numerical processing.

Authors:  Dana Ganor-Stern; Joseph Tzelgov
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 3.051

View more
  22 in total

1.  Physical similarity (and not quantity representation) drives perceptual comparison of numbers: evidence from two Indian notations.

Authors:  Javier García-Orza; Manuel Perea; Reem Abu Mallouh; Manuel Carreiras
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2012-04

2.  Evidence for distinct magnitude systems for symbolic and non-symbolic number.

Authors:  Delphine Sasanguie; Bert De Smedt; Bert Reynvoet
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2015-12-26

3.  Numerical representations are neither abstract nor automatic.

Authors:  Dale J Cohen
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 12.579

4.  The numerical distance effect is task dependent.

Authors:  Liat Goldfarb; Avishai Henik; Orly Rubinsten; Yafit Bloch-David; Limor Gertner
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2011-11

Review 5.  Number concepts: abstract and embodied.

Authors:  Martin H Fischer; Samuel Shaki
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2018-08-05       Impact factor: 6.237

6.  Numerical-spatial representation affects spatial coding: binding errors across the numerical distance effect.

Authors:  Isabel Arend; Sharon Naparstek; Avishai Henik
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-12

7.  How numbers mean: Comparing random walk models of numerical cognition varying both encoding processes and underlying quantity representations.

Authors:  Dale J Cohen; Philip T Quinlan
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2016-11-07       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  On the neuro-cognitive foundations of basic auditory number processing: an fMRI study.

Authors:  Elise Klein; Korbinian Moeller; Hans-Christoph Nuerk; Klaus Willmes
Journal:  Behav Brain Funct       Date:  2010-07-09       Impact factor: 3.759

9.  Cross-format physical similarity effects and their implications for the numerical cognition architecture.

Authors:  Dale J Cohen; Erin Warren; Daryn Blanc-Goldhammer
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2013-04-25       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Semantic alignment and number comparison.

Authors:  Jamie I D Campbell; Sean G Sacher
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2011-04-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.