Notational Modulation of the SNARC and the MARC (Linguistic Markedness of Response Codes) Effect

Number magnitude and number parity representation are fundamental number representations. However, the representation of parity is much less understood than that of magnitude: Therefore, we investigated it by examining the (new) Linguistic Markedness of Response Codes (MARC) effect: Responses are facilitated if stimuli and response codes both have the same (congruent) linguistic markedness (even–right, odd–left) while incongruent conditions (even–left, odd–right) lead to interference. We examined systematically the MARC (for parity) and the Spatial Numerical Association of Response Codes (SNARC; for magnitude) effect for different number notations (positive Arabic, negative Arabic, number words) and with different methods of data analysis. In a parity judgement task, the SNARCeffect indicating a magnitude representation was replicated for all notations except for negative numerals. The MARCeffect was found for number words in all analyses, but less consistently for the other notations. In contrast, a correlational analysis of the reaction time (RT) data, as suggested by Sternberg (1969) using a nonmetric multi–dimensional scaling (MDS) procedure, produced a clear association of parity and response code for all notations (MARCeffect), but little evidence of the SNARCeffect. We discuss the extent to which these notation–specific MARC and SNARC effects constrain current models of number processing and elaborate on the possible functional locus of the MARC effect.

[1]  Sharon Lee Armstrong,et al.  What some concepts might not be , 1983, Cognition.

[2]  Louis Guttman,et al.  The Guttman-Lingoes nonmetric program series , 1973 .

[3]  M. McCloskey,et al.  In defense of a modular architecture for the number-processing system: reply to Campbell and Clark. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[4]  M. McCloskey,et al.  Chapter 13 The Functional Architecture Of Numerical Processing Mechanisms: Defending The Modular Model , 1992 .

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

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

[7]  ROBERT S. MOYER,et al.  Time required for Judgements of Numerical Inequality , 1967, Nature.

[8]  K. Zimmer.  Affixal negation in English and other languages : an investigation of restricted productivity , 1966 .

[9]  M. Brysbaert.  Arabic number reading: On the nature of the numerical scale and the origin of phonological recoding. , 1995 .

[10]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Single-digit and two-digit Arabic numerals address the same semantic number line , 1999, Cognition.

[11]  D W Massaro,et al.  Retroactive interference in short-term recognition memory for pitch. , 1970, Journal of experimental psychology.

[12]  I. Borg.  Multidimensional similarity structure analysis , 1987 .

[13]  J. L. Myers,et al.  Regression analyses of repeated measures data in cognitive research. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[14]  Jamie I. D. Campbell,et al.  An encoding-complex view of cognitive number processing: Comment on McCloskey, Sokol, and Goodman (1986). , 1988 .

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

[16]  Jamie I. D. Campbell.  Architectures for numerical cognition , 1994, Cognition.

[17]  Mark A. Sherman,et al.  Adjectival Negation and the Comprehension of Multiply Negated Sentences. , 1976 .

[18]  B. Butterworth,et al.  Toward a multiroute model of number processing: Impaired number transcoding with preserved calculation skills. , 1995 .

[19]  R. Shepard,et al.  The internal representation of numbers , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[20]  Klaus Willmes,et al.  A Unit-Decade Compatibility Effect in German Number Words , 2002 .

[21]  Paul B. Buckley,et al.  Comparisons of digits and dot patterns. , 1974, Journal of experimental psychology.

[22]  Jamie I. D. Campbell,et al.  Integrated versus modular theories of number skills and acalculia , 1991, Brain and Cognition.

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

[24]  Klaus Willmes,et al.  Decade breaks in the mental number line? Putting the tens and units back in different bins , 2001, Cognition.

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

[26]  Saul Sternberg,et al.  The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method , 1969 .

[27]  Jamie I. D. Campbell,et al.  Chapter 12 Cognitive Number Processing: An Encoding-Complex Perspective , 1992 .

[28]  James W. Stigler,et al.  Counting in Chinese: Cultural variation in a basic cognitive skill , 1987 .

[29]  S Dehaene,et al.  CALCULATING WITHOUT READING: UNSUSPECTED RESIDUAL ABILITIES IN PURE ALEXIA , 2000, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[30]  Mark A. Sherman,et al.  Bound to be easier? The negative prefix and sentence comprehension , 1973 .

[31]  James W. Stigler,et al.  Meanings of Skill: Effects of Abacus Expertise on Number Representation , 1991 .

[32]  S. Sternberg.  Discovering mental processing stages: The method of additive factors. , 1998 .

[33]  Willem J. M. Levelt,et al.  A theory of lexical access in speech production , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[34]  T. Hines,et al.  An odd effect: Lengthened reaction times for judgments about odd digits , 1990, Memory & cognition.

[35]  Jamie I. D. Campbell,et al.  The surface form×problem size interaction in cognitive arithmetic: evidence against an encoding locus , 1999, Cognition.

[36]  S Dehaene,et al.  The psychophysics of numerical comparison: A reexamination of apparently incompatible data , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

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

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

[39]  J. I. Campbell.  Linguistic influences in cognitive arithmetic: comment on Noel, Fias and Brsybaert (1997) , 1998, Cognition.

[40]  S. Dehaene.  Varieties of numerical abilities , 1992, Cognition.

[41]  L. Guttman.  A general nonmetric technique for finding the smallest coordinate space for a configuration of points , 1968 .

[42]  S. Dehaene,et al.  Is numerical comparison digital? Analogical and symbolic effects in two-digit number comparison. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

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

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

[46]  James V. Hinrichs,et al.  Two-digit number comparison: Use of place information. , 1981 .

[47]  Jamie I. D. Campbell.  Chapter 14 In Defense Of The Encoding-Complex Approach: Reply To Mccloskey, Macaruso, & Whetstone , 1992 .

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

[49]  G. R. Potts,et al.  Mental comparison of size and magnitude: size congruity effects. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[50]  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.

[51]  Stanislas Dehaene,et al.  Cerebral Pathways for Calculation: Double Dissociation between Rote Verbal and Quantitative Knowledge of Arithmetic , 1997, Cortex.

[52]  Rochel Gelman,et al.  The Child's Representation of Number: A Multidimensional Scaling Analysis. , 1983 .