Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (27)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (27) (remove)
Language
- English (27)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (27) (remove)
Keywords
- SNARC (9)
- Mental number line (6)
- SNARC effect (5)
- mental arithmetic (5)
- operational momentum (5)
- Numerical cognition (4)
- Operational momentum (4)
- embodied cognition (4)
- numerical cognition (4)
- Mental arithmetic (3)
Institute
1 + 2 is more than 2 + 1: Violations of commutativity and identity axioms in mental arithmetic
(2015)
Over the past decade or so, a large number of studies have revealed that conceptual meaning is sensitive to situational context. More recently, similar contextual influences have been documented in the domain of number knowledge. Here we show such context dependency in a length production task. Adult participants saw single digit addition problems of the form n1 + n2 and produced the sum by changing bi-directionally the length of a horizontally extended line, using radially arranged buttons. We found that longer lines were produced when n1 < n2 compared to n1 > n2 and that unit size increased with result size. Thus, the mathematical axioms of commutativity and identity do not seem to hold in mental addition. We discuss implications of these observations for our understanding of cognitive mechanisms involved in mental arithmetic and for situated cognition generally.
"Left" and "right" coordinates control our spatial behavior and even influence abstract thoughts. For number concepts, horizontal spatial-numerical associations (SNAs) have been widely documented: we associate few with left and many with right. Importantly, increments are universally coded on the right side even in preverbal humans and nonhuman animals, thus questioning the fundamental role of directional cultural habits, such as reading or finger counting. Here, we propose a biological, nonnumerical mechanism for the origin of SNAs on the basis of asymmetric tuning of animal brains for different spatial frequencies (SFs). The resulting selective visual processing predicts both universal SNAs and their context-dependence. We support our proposal by analyzing the stimuli used to document SNAs in newborns for their SF content. As predicted, the SFs contained in visual patterns with few versus many elements preferentially engage right versus left brain hemispheres, respectively, thus predicting left-versus rightward behavioral biases. Our "brain's asymmetric frequency tuning" hypothesis explains the perceptual origin of horizontal SNAs for nonsymbolic visual numerosities and might be extensible to the auditory domain.
Number processing evokes spatial biases, both when dealing with single digits and in more complex mental calculations. Here we investigated whether these two biases have a common origin, by examining their flexibility. Participants pointed to the locations of arithmetic results on a visually presented line with an inverted, right-to-left number arrangement. We found directionally opposite spatial biases for mental arithmetic and for a parity task administered both before and after the arithmetic task. We discuss implications of this dissociation in our results for the task-dependent cognitive representation of numbers.
Commentary
(2020)
Mental arithmetic exhibits various biases. Among those is a tendency to overestimate addition and to underestimate subtraction outcomes. Does such “operational momentum” (OM) also affect multiplication and division? Twenty-six adults produced lines whose lengths corresponded to the correct outcomes of multiplication and division problems shown in symbolic format. We found a reliable tendency to over-estimate division outcomes, i.e., reverse OM. We suggest that anchoring on the first operand (a tendency to use this number as a reference for further quantitative reasoning) contributes to cognitive biases in mental arithmetic.
This special issue, "Concrete constraints of abstract concepts", addresses the role of concrete determinants, both external and internal to the human body, in acquisition, processing and use of abstract concepts while at the same time presenting to the readers an overview of methods used to assess their representation.
Spatial-numerical associations (SNAs) have been studied extensively in the past two decades, always requiring either explicit magnitude processing or explicit spatial-directional processing. This means that the typical finding of an association of small numbers with left or bottom space and of larger numbers with right or top space could be due to these requirements and not the conceptual representation of numbers. The present study compares explicit and implicit magnitude processing in an implicit spatial-directional task and identifies SNAs as artefacts of either explicit magnitude processing or explicit spatial-directional processing; they do not reveal spatial conceptual links. This finding requires revision of current accounts of the relationship between numbers and space.
Western adults associate small numbers with left space and large numbers with right space. Where does this pervasive spatial-numerical association come from? In this study, we first recorded directional counting preferences in adults with different reading experiences (left to right, right to left, mixed, and illiterate) and observed a clear relationship between reading and counting directions. We then recorded directional counting preferences in pre-schoolers and elementary school children from three of these reading cultures (left to right, right to left, and mixed). Culture-specific counting biases existed before reading acquisition in children as young as 3 years and were subsequently modified by early reading experience. Together, our results suggest that both directional counting and scanning activities contribute to number-space associations.
Reproducibility is a defining feature of science, but the extent to which it characterizes current research is unknown. We conducted replications of 100 experimental and correlational studies published in three psychology journals using high-powered designs and original materials when available. Replication effects were half the magnitude of original effects, representing a substantial decline. Ninety-seven percent of original studies had statistically significant results. Thirty-six percent of replications had statistically significant results; 47% of original effect sizes were in the 95% confidence interval of the replication effect size; 39% of effects were subjectively rated to have replicated the original result; and if no bias in original results is assumed, combining original and replication results left 68% with statistically significant effects. Correlational tests suggest that replication success was better predicted by the strength of original evidence than by characteristics of the original and replication teams.