Comparing the neural distance effect derived from the non–symbolic comparison and the same–different task

As a result of the representation of numerosities, more accurate and faster discrimination between two numerosities is observed when the distance between them increases. In previous studies, the comparison and same-different task were most frequently used to investigate this distance effect. Recently, it was questioned whether the non-symbolic distance effects derived from these tasks originate at the same level. In the current study, we examined the behavioral and neural distance effects of the comparison and same-different task to assess potential differences between both tasks. Participants were first year university students. Each participant completed both tasks, while their reaction time, accuracy and brain activity on predefined components was measured. The early N1-P2p transition and the P2p component on temporo-occipital (TO) and inferior parietal (IP) electrode groups were considered, as well as the late P3 component on a central (C) electrode group. The results showed that the behavioral distance effects from both tasks were comparable, although participants' performance was worse on the same-different task. The neural results revealed similar effects of distance on the mean amplitudes for the early components for both tasks (all p′s < 0.02) and an additional effect of task difficulty on the mean amplitudes of these components. Similar as in previous studies, we found a (marginally) significant increase in mean amplitude of the later P3 component with increasing distance for the comparison (p = 0.07), but not for the same-different task. Apparently, the initial stages of number processing are comparable for both tasks, but an additional later stage is only present for the comparison task. The P3 effect would be indicative of this decisional stage, which was previously proposed to underlie the comparison distance effect (CDE).

[1]  Marinella Cappelletti,et al.  The Role of Right and Left Parietal Lobes in the Conceptual Processing of Numbers , 2009, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[2]  Daniel C. Hyde,et al.  All Numbers Are Not Equal: An Electrophysiological Investigation of Small and Large Number Representations , 2009, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[3]  J. Polich,et al.  Cognitive and biological determinants of P300: an integrative review , 1995, Biological Psychology.

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

[5]  Brian Butterworth,et al.  Are Subitizing and Counting Implemented as Separate or Functionally Overlapping Processes? , 2002, NeuroImage.

[6]  J. Leon Kenemans,et al.  Stroop interference and the timing of selective response activation , 2008, Clinical Neurophysiology.

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

[8]  E. Donchin,et al.  COGNITIVE PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY: THE ENDOGENOUS COMPONENTS OF THE ERP , 1978 .

[9]  Kelly S. Mix,et al.  Amount Versus Number: Infants' Use of Area and Contour Length to Discriminate Small Sets , 2001 .

[10]  Catherine Sophian,et al.  How do people apprehend large numerosities? , 2008, Cognition.

[11]  E. Van den Bussche,et al.  The reliability of and the relation between non-symbolic numerical distance effects in comparison, same-different judgments and priming. , 2011, Acta psychologica.

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

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

[14]  Avishai Henik,et al.  Mental representation: What can pitch tell us about the distance effect? , 2008, Cortex.

[15]  M. Thioux,et al.  Neuroanatomical Substrates of Arabic Number Processing, Numerical Comparison, and Simple Addition: A PET Study , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[16]  M. Posner,et al.  Brain mechanisms of quantity are similar in 5-year-old children and adults. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  Avishai Henik,et al.  The Brain Locus of Interaction between Number and Size: A Combined Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Event-related Potential Study , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[18]  Titia Gebuis,et al.  Conflict processing of symbolic and non-symbolic numerosity , 2010, Neuropsychologia.

[19]  Emmy Defever,et al.  Association between basic numerical abilities and mathematics achievement. , 2012, The British journal of developmental psychology.

[20]  J. Nandrino,et al.  Temporal localization of the response selection processing stage. , 1995, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[21]  Melissa E. Libertus,et al.  Stable individual differences in number discrimination in infancy. , 2010, Developmental science.

[22]  Mieke Vandewaetere,et al.  What can the same-different task tell us about the development of magnitude representations? , 2012, Acta psychologica.

[23]  T. Verguts,et al.  Dissecting the symbolic distance effect: Comparison and priming effects in numerical and nonnumerical orders , 2008, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[24]  Rochel Gelman,et al.  Variability signatures distinguish verbal from nonverbal counting for both large and small numbers , 2001, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

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

[26]  E. John,et al.  Evoked-Potential Correlates of Stimulus Uncertainty , 1965, Science.

[27]  E. J. Carter,et al.  Functional Imaging of Numerical Processing in Adults and 4-y-Old Children , 2006, PLoS biology.

[28]  Melissa E. Libertus,et al.  Electrophysiological evidence for notation independence in numerical processing , 2007, Behavioral and Brain Functions.

[29]  S. Dehaene,et al.  A Magnitude Code Common to Numerosities and Number Symbols in Human Intraparietal Cortex , 2007, Neuron.

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

[31]  Daniel Ansari,et al.  Developmental Specialization in the Right Intraparietal Sulcus for the Abstract Representation of Numerical Magnitude , 2010, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[32]  Bert Reynvoet,et al.  Continuous visual properties explain neural responses to nonsymbolic number. , 2012, Psychophysiology.

[33]  Titia Gebuis,et al.  Numerosities and space; indeed a cognitive illusion! A reply to de Hevia and Spelke (2009) , 2011, Cognition.

[34]  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.

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

[36]  E. M. Duncan,et al.  Isolating the effects of symbolic distance, and semantic congruity in comparative judgments: An additive-factors analysis , 1980, Memory & cognition.

[37]  Valérie Dormal,et al.  Common and Specific Contributions of the Intraparietal Sulci to Numerosity and Length Processing , 2009, NeuroImage.

[38]  E. Spelke,et al.  Language and Conceptual Development series Core systems of number , 2004 .

[39]  Michaël A. Stevens,et al.  A model of exact small-number representation , 2005, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[40]  T. Verguts,et al.  The origins of the numerical distance effect: The same–different task , 2011 .

[41]  H. Gray,et al.  P300 as an index of attention to self-relevant stimuli , 2004 .

[42]  Silke M Göbel,et al.  Cognitive Neuroscience: Acting on Numbers , 2004, Current Biology.

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

[44]  Titia Gebuis,et al.  False Approximations of the Approximate Number System? , 2011, PloS one.

[45]  John H. Robinson,et al.  P300 and Response Selection: A New Look Using Independent-Components Analysis , 2004, Brain Topography.

[46]  Daniel Ansari,et al.  Domain-specific and domain-general changes in children's development of number comparison. , 2008, Developmental science.

[47]  R. Cabeza,et al.  Frontiers in Human Neuroscience , 2009 .

[48]  Craig Leth-Steensen,et al.  Effects of instruction presentation mode in comparative judgments , 2006, Memory & cognition.