Literature DB >> 677346

Perceived numerosity, item arrangement, and expectancy.

N Ginsburg.   

Abstract

Ten sets of dots ranging in number from 7 to 91 per set were presented to 54 subjects. Half were arranged regularly and half randomly. The regular sets were overestimated by an average of 22%, while the random were underestimated by 16% compared with the physical number. Evidence was presented showing that subjects expect results in the opposite direction. The findings are discussed in relation to the expectancy-contrast model of Birnbaum and Veit.

Mesh:

Year:  1978        PMID: 677346

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Psychol        ISSN: 0002-9556


  9 in total

1.  Single-parameter power law psychophysics of auditory numerosity and the psychological moment hypothesis.

Authors:  G H Robinson
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1992-04

2.  Size invariance in visual number discrimination.

Authors:  J Allik; T Tuulmets; P G Vos
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  1991

3.  Connectedness affects dot numerosity judgment: implications for configural processing.

Authors:  Lixia He; Jun Zhang; Tiangang Zhou; Lin Chen
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2009-06

4.  The effect of line configuration on perceived numerosity of dotted lines.

Authors:  A Krishna; P Raghubir
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1997-07

5.  Interactions between area and numerosity.

Authors:  P G Vos; M P van Oeffelen; H J Tibosch; J Allik
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  1988

6.  Numerosity estimation in visual stimuli in the absence of luminance-based cues.

Authors:  Peter Kramer; Maria Grazia Di Bono; Marco Zorzi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Alternation between different types of evidence attenuates judgments of severity.

Authors:  Jennifer C Whitman; Jiaying Zhao; Rebecca M Todd
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-07-06       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Grouping effects in numerosity perception under prolonged viewing conditions.

Authors:  Leo Poom; Marcus Lindskog; Anders Winman; Ronald van den Berg
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-02-13       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Graphical Aids to the Estimation and Discrimination of Uncertain Numerical Data.

Authors:  Myeong-Hun Jeong; Matt Duckham; Susanne Bleisch
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-27       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.