Moving the eyes along the mental number line: Comparing SNARC effects with saccadic and manual responses

Bimanual parity judgments about numerically small (large) digits are faster with the left (right) hand, even though parity is unrelated to numerical magnitude per se (the SNARC effect; Dehaene, Bossini, & Giraux, 1993). According to one model, this effect reflects a space-related representation of numerical magnitudes (mental number line) with a genuine left-to-right orientation. Alternatively, it may simply reflect an overlearned motor association between numbers and manual responses—as, for example, on typewriters or computer keyboards#x2014;in which case it should be weaker or absent with effectors whose horizontal response component is less systematically associated with individual numbers. Two experiments involving comparisons of saccadic and manual parity judgment tasks clearly support the first view; they also establish a vertical SNARC effect, suggesting that our magnitude representation resembles a number map, rather than a number line.

[1]  D. Berch,et al.  Extracting parity and magnitude from Arabic numerals: developmental changes in number processing and mental representation. , 1999, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[2]  Stephen E. Fienberg,et al.  Discrete Multivariate Analysis: Theory and Practice , 1976 .

[3]  Anja Ischebeck,et al.  On the relative speed account of number-size interference in comparative judgments of numerals. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  W. Schwarz,et al.  On the temporal dynamics of digit comparison processes , 1998 .

[5]  Mark L. Latash,et al.  Mirror Writing: Learning, Transfer, and Implications for Internal Inverse Models. , 1999, Journal of motor behavior.

[6]  M. Corballis.  Can commissurotomized subjects compare digits between the visual fields? , 1994, Neuropsychologia.

[7]  P. Dixon,et al.  Dynamic illusion effects in a reaching task: evidence for separate visual representations in the planning and control of reaching. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  R. Verleger,et al.  Validity and boundary conditions of automatic response activation in the Simon task. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  M. Goodale,et al.  The visual brain in action , 1995 .

[10]  M. McCloskey.  Cognitive mechanisms in numerical processing: Evidence from acquired dyscalculia , 1992, Cognition.

[11]  Brian Butterworth,et al.  The Mathematical Brain , 1999 .

[12]  S Dehaene,et al.  Attention, automaticity, and levels of representation in number processing. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[13]  L Girelli,et al.  The development of automaticity in accessing number magnitude. , 2000, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[14]  Matthew F. S. Rushworth,et al.  The Mental Number Line and the Human Angular Gyrus , 2001, NeuroImage.

[15]  S. Dehaene,et al.  Abstract representations of numbers in the animal and human brain , 1998, Trends in Neurosciences.

[16]  M. Tlauka.  The processing of numbers in choice‐reaction tasks , 2002 .

[17]  S. Dehaene,et al.  The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. , 1993 .

[18]  M. H. Fischer,et al.  Number processing induces spatial performance biases , 2001, Neurology.

[19]  W. Fias.  The Importance of Magnitude Information in Numerical Processing: Evidence from the SNARC Effect , 1996 .

[20]  Michael D. Dodd,et al.  Perceiving numbers causes spatial shifts of attention , 2003, Nature Neuroscience.

[21]  Daniel Algom,et al.  Comparative judgment of numerosity and numerical magnitude: attention preempts automaticity. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[22]  C. Gallistel,et al.  Language and spatial frames of reference in mind and brain , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[23]  Avishai Henik,et al.  Automatic and intentional processing of numerical information , 1992 .

[24]  G. Logan,et al.  Magnitude versus parity in numerical judgements: event-related brain potentials implicate response conflict as the source of interference. , 1996, Acta psychologica.

[25]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Enhanced Perception of Illusory Contours in the Lower Versus Upper Visual Hemifields , 1996, Science.

[26]  D. Algom,et al.  The perception of number from the separability of the stimulus: The Stroop effect revisited , 1996, Memory & cognition.

[27]  S. Dehaene,et al.  The Number Sense: How the Mind Creates Mathematics. , 1998 .

[28]  W Schwarz,et al.  Sequential effects in number comparison. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[29]  Peter Dixon,et al.  Dynamic effects of the Ebbinghaus illusion in grasping: Support for a planning/control model of action , 2002, Perception & psychophysics.

[30]  R. Schmidt,et al.  Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis, 4th ed. , 2005 .

[31]  Derek Besner,et al.  Ideographic and alphabetic processing in skilled reading of English , 1979, Neuropsychologia.

[32]  Timothy D. Lee,et al.  Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis , 1982 .

[33]  D. Algom,et al.  Stroop and Garner effects in comparative judgment of numerals: The role of attention. , 1999 .

[34]  P. Holland,et al.  Discrete Multivariate Analysis. , 1976 .

[35]  W. Fias,et al.  Semantic Influences on Feature-Based Attention Due to Overlap of Neural Circuits , 2002, Cortex.

[36]  M. Goldberg,et al.  Space and attention in parietal cortex. , 1999, Annual review of neuroscience.

[37]  W Fias,et al.  Irrelevant digits affect feature-based attention depending on the overlap of neural circuits. , 2001, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[38]  K. Priftis,et al.  Brain damage: Neglect disrupts the mental number line , 2002, Nature.

[39]  D. A. Taylor,et al.  The cuing and priming of cognitive operations. , 1987, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[40]  F. Restle.  Speed of Adding and Comparing Numbers. , 1970 .

[41]  Stanislas Dehaene,et al.  The Organization of Brain Activations in Number Comparison: Event-Related Potentials and the Additive-Factors Method , 1996, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[42]  M. Ashcraft.  Cognitive arithmetic: A review of data and theory , 1992, Cognition.

[43]  H. Heinze,et al.  On the interaction of numerical and size information in digit comparison: a behavioral and event-related potential study , 1998, Neuropsychologia.

[44]  C. Gallistel,et al.  Preverbal and verbal counting and computation , 1992, Cognition.

[45]  E. Spelke,et al.  Sources of mathematical thinking: behavioral and brain-imaging evidence. , 1999, Science.

[46]  Peter Brugger,et al.  Stimulus-response compatibility in representational space , 1998, Neuropsychologia.

[47]  S. Dehaene,et al.  Differential Contributions of the Left and Right Inferior Parietal Lobules to Number Processing , 1999, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[48]  W Fias,et al.  Two routes for the processing of verbal numbers: evidence from the SNARC effect , 2001, Psychological research.