The Role of Visual Information in Numerosity Estimation

Mainstream theory suggests that the approximate number system supports our non-symbolic number abilities (e.g. estimating or comparing different sets of items). It is argued that this system can extract number independently of the visual cues present in the stimulus (diameter, aggregate surface, etc.). However, in a recent report we argue that this might not be the case. We showed that participants combined information from different visual cues to derive their answers. While numerosity comparison requires a rough comparison of two sets of items (smaller versus larger), numerosity estimation requires a more precise mechanism. It could therefore be that numerosity estimation, in contrast to numerosity comparison, might rely on the approximate number system. To test this hypothesis, we conducted a numerosity estimation experiment. We controlled for the visual cues according to current standards: each single visual property was not informative about numerosity. Nevertheless, the results reveal that participants were influenced by the visual properties of the dot arrays. They gave a larger estimate when the dot arrays consisted of dots with, on average, a smaller diameter, aggregate surface or density but a larger convex hull. The reliance on visual cues to estimate numerosity suggests that the existence of an approximate number system that can extract numerosity independently of the visual cues is unlikely. Instead, we propose that humans estimate numerosity by weighing the different visual cues present in the stimuli.

[1]  Daniel Ansari,et al.  Evidence against a strong association between numerical symbols and the quantities they represent , 2012, CogSci.

[2]  Rochel Gelman,et al.  Sometimes area counts more than number , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[3]  Justin Halberda,et al.  Developmental change in the acuity of the "Number Sense": The Approximate Number System in 3-, 4-, 5-, and 6-year-olds and adults. , 2008, Developmental psychology.

[4]  Philippe Pinel,et al.  Tuning Curves for Approximate Numerosity in the Human Intraparietal Sulcus , 2004, Neuron.

[5]  P. G. Vos,et al.  A probabilistic model for the discrimination of visual number , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

[6]  Bert Reynvoet,et al.  The interplay between nonsymbolic number and its continuous visual properties. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[7]  Bert Reynvoet,et al.  Generating nonsymbolic number stimuli , 2011, Behavior research methods.

[8]  Stanislas Dehaene,et al.  Development of Elementary Numerical Abilities: A Neuronal Model , 1993, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[9]  Elizabeth S Spelke,et al.  Neural signatures of number processing in human infants: evidence for two core systems underlying numerical cognition. , 2011, Developmental science.

[10]  P. Lemaire,et al.  Aging and numerosity estimation. , 2007, The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences.

[11]  Stanislas Dehaene,et al.  Calibrating the mental number line , 2008, Cognition.

[12]  Marie-Pascale Noël,et al.  The development of automatic numerosity processing in preschoolers: evidence for numerosity-perceptual interference. , 2008, Developmental psychology.

[13]  Marie-Pascale Noël,et al.  Magnitude comparison in preschoolers: what counts? Influence of perceptual variables. , 2004, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[14]  E. Spelke,et al.  The construction of large number representations in adults , 2003, Cognition.

[15]  Andrea Facoetti,et al.  Developmental trajectory of number acuity reveals a severe impairment in developmental dyscalculia , 2010, Cognition.

[16]  Matthew Inglis,et al.  Measuring the Approximate Number System , 2011, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  T. Tuulmets,et al.  Occupancy model of perceived numerosity , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[18]  A. L. Miller,et al.  The effects of shape, size, heterogeneity, and instructional set on the judgment of visual number. , 1968, The American journal of psychology.

[19]  Fruzsina Soltész,et al.  Relationships between magnitude representation, counting and memory in 4- to 7-year-old children: A developmental study , 2010, Behavioral and Brain Functions.

[20]  F. Kingdom,et al.  A common visual metric for approximate number and density , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.