The Nature of Associations between Physical Stimulus Size and Left-Right Response Codes
By: Melanie Richter and Peter Wühr
References
- Ashby, F. G., & Ell, S. W. (2001). The neurobiology of human category learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5, 204–201. DOI: 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01624-7
- Cipora, K., Hohol, M., Nuerk, H.-C., Willmes, K., Brożek, B., Kucharzyk, B., & Nęcka, E. (2016). Professional mathematicians differ from controls in their spatial-numerical associations. Psychological Research, 80(4), 710–726. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-015-0677-6
- Cipora, K., Patro, K., & Nuerk, H.-C. (2015). Are spatial-numerical associations a cornerstone for arithmetic learning? The lack of genuine correlations suggests no. Mind, Brain and Education. Special Issue: Facets of the Mathematical Brain—From Number Processing to Mathematical Problem Solving, 9(4), 190–206. DOI: 10.1111/mbe.12093
- De Jong, R., Liang, C. C., & Lauber, E. (1994). Conditional and unconditional automaticity: a dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(4), 731–750. DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.20.4.731
- Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(3), 371–396. DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.122.3.371
- Dehaene, S., Dupoux, E., & Mehler, J. (1990). Is numerical comparison digital? Analogical and symbolic effects in two-digit number comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16(3), 626–641. DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.16.3.626
- Fias, W., Brysbaert, M., Geypens, F., & d’Ydewalle, G. (1996). The importance of magnitude information in numerical processing: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Mathematical Cognition, 2(1), 95–110. DOI: 10.1080/135467996387552
- Fias, W., & Fischer, M. H. (2005).
Spatial representation of numbers . In J. I. D. Campbell (Ed.), Handbook of mathematical cognition (pp. 43–54). Psychology Press. DOI: 10.4324/9780203998045.ch3 - Fias, W., Lauwereyns, J., & Lammertyn, J. (2001). Irrelevant digits affect feature-based attention depending on the overlap of neural circuits. Cognitive Brain Research, 12(3), 415–423. DOI: 10.1016/S0926-6410(01)00078-7
- Fitts, P. M., & Seeger, C. M. (1953). S-R compatibility: spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46(3), 199–210. DOI: 10.1037/h0062827
- Gevers, W., & Lammertyn, J. (2005). The hunt for SNARC. Psychology Science, 47(1), 10–21.
- Gevers, W., Santens, S., Dhooge, E., Chen, Q., Van den Bossche, L., Fias, W., & Verguts, T. (2010). Verbal-spatial and visuospatial coding of number-space interactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139(1), 180–190. DOI: 10.1037/a0017688
- Gevers, W., Verguts, T., Reynvoet, B., Caessens, B., & Fias, W. (2006). Numbers and space: A computational model of the SNARC effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(1), 32–44. DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.32.1.32
- Hartmann, M., Gashaj, V., Stahnke, A., & Mast, F. W. (2014). There is more than “more is up”: hand and foot responses reverse the vertical association of number magnitudes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(4), 1401–1414. DOI: 10.1037/a0036686
- Hartmann, M., Grabherr, L., & Mast, F. W. (2011). Moving along the mental number line: interactions between whole-body motion and numerical cognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(6), 1416–1427. DOI: 10.1037/a0026706
- Harwell, M. (1998). Misinterpreting interaction effects in analysis of variance. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 31(2), 125–136. DOI: 10.1080/07481756.1998.12068958
- He, Y., Nuerk, H.-C., Derksen, A., Shi, J., Zhou, X., & Cipora, C. (2021). A gifted SNARC? Directional spatial–numerical associations in gifted children with high-level math skills do not differ from controls. Psychological Research, 85, 1645–1661. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-020-01354-9
- Hommel, B. (2011). The Simon effect as tool and heuristic. Acta Psychologica, 136(2), 189–202. DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.04.011
- Hubbard, E., Piazza, M., Pinel, P., & Dehaene, S. (2005). Interactions between number and space in parietal cortex. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6, 435–448. DOI: 10.1038/nrn1684
- Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus response compatibility—A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97(2), 253–270. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.97.2.253
- Leibovich, T., & Henik, A. (2014). Comparing performance in discrete and continuous comparison tasks. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(5), 899–917. DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2013.837940
- Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81–97. DOI: 10.1037/h0043158
- Moyer, R. S., & Landauer, T. K. (1967). Time required for judgements of numerical inequality. Nature, 215(5109), 1519–1520. DOI: 10.1038/2151519a0
- Nys, J., & Content, A. (2012). Judgement of discrete and continuous quantity in adults: Number counts! The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(4), 675–690. DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2011.619661
- Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9(1), 97–113. DOI: 10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4
- Plaisier, M. A., & Smeets, J. B. J. (2011). Number magnitude to finger mapping is disembodied and topological. Experimental Brain Research, 209, 395–400. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-011-2562-x
- Proctor, R. W., & Cho, Y. S. (2006). Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 416–442. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.416
- Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2006). Stimulus-response compatibility principles. Data, theory, and application. Taylor & Francis. DOI: 10.1201/9780203022795
- Proctor, R. W., & Xiong, A. (2015). Polarity correspondence as a general compatibility principle. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(6), 446–451. DOI: 10.1177/0963721415607305
- Ren, P., Nicholls, M. R., Ma, Y., & Chen, L. (2011). Size matters: Non-numerical magnitude affects the spatial coding of response. Plos ONE, 6(8),
e23553 . DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0023553 - Rosnow, R. L., & Rosenthal, R. (1989). Definition and interpretation of interaction effects. Psychological Bulletin, 105(1), 143–146. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.105.1.143
- Seegelke, C., & Wühr, P. (2018). Compatibility between object size and response side in grasping: The left hand prefers smaller objects, the right hand prefers larger objects. PeerJ, 6,
e6026 . DOI: 10.7717/peerj.6026 - Shaki, S., & Petrusic, W. M. (2005). On the mental representation of negative numbers: Context-dependent SNARC effects with comparative judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 931–937. DOI: 10.3758/BF03196788
- Shaki, S., Petrusic, W. M., & Leth-Steensen, C. (2012). SNARC effects with numerical and non-numerical symbolic comparative judgments: instructional and cultural dependencies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(2), 515–530. DOI: 10.1037/a0026729
- Simmons, F., Gallagher-Mitchell, T., & Ogden, R. S. (2019). Response-irrelevant number, duration, and extent information triggers the SQARC effect: Evidence from an implicit paradigm. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72(9), 2261–2271. DOI: 10.1177/1747021819839413
- Simon, J. R., & Rudell, A. P. (1967). Auditory S-R compatibility: The effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51(3), 300–304. DOI: 10.1037/h0020586
- Tagliabue, M., Zorzi, M., Umiltà, C., & Bassignani, F. (2000). The role of long-term-memory and short-term-memory links in the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26(2), 648–670. DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.26.2.648
- Walsh, V. (2003). A theory of magnitude: Common cortical metrics of time, space and quantity. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(11), 483–488. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2003.09.002
- Walsh, V. (2015).
A theory of magnitude: The parts that sum to number . In R. C. Kadosh & A. Dowker (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of numerical cognition (pp. 552–565). Oxford University Press. - Weber, D. L., Green, D. M., & Luce, R. D. (1977). Effects of practice and distribution of auditory signals on absolute identification. Perception & Psychophysics, 22(3), 223–231. DOI: 10.3758/BF03199683
- Wood, G., Willmes, K., Nuerk, H.-C., & Fischer, M. H. (2008). On the cognitive link between space and number: A meta-analysis of the SNARC effect. Psychology Science Quarterly, 50(4), 489–525.
- Wühr, P., & Richter, M. (2021). Relative, not absolute, stimulus size is responsible for a correspondence effect between physical stimulus size and left/right response locations. Manuscript submitted for publication.
- Wühr, P., & Seegelke, C. (2018). Compatibility between physical stimulus size and left–right responses: small is left and large is right. Journal of Cognition, 1(17). DOI: 10.5334/joc.19
- Yu, S., Li, B., Zhang, S., Yang, T., Jiang, T., Chen, C., & Dong, Q. (2018). Does the spatial numerical association of response codes effect depend on digits’ relative or absolute magnitude? Evidence from a perceptual orientation judgment task. The Journal of General Psychology, 145(4), 415–430. DOI: 10.1080/00221309.2018.1532391
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.206 | Journal eISSN: 2514-4820
Language: English
Submitted on: Sep 14, 2021
Accepted on: Jan 16, 2022
Published on: Feb 1, 2022
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year
Keywords:
© 2022 Melanie Richter, Peter Wühr, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.