ArticleFrontiers in psychology2014
Not all numbers are equal: preferences and biases among children and adults when generating random sequences.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neuromuscular Diseases Affect Number Representation and Processing: An Exploratory Study.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Developmental Changes in the Effect of Active Left and Right Head Rotation on Random Number Generation.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
- Which numbers do you have in mind? Number generation is influenced by reading direction.Cognitive processing · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigate the number preferences of children and adults when generating random digit sequences. Previous research has shown convincingly that adults prefer smaller numbers when randomly choosing between responses 1-6. We analyze randomization choices made by both children and adults, considering a range of experimental studies and task configurations. Children - most of whom are between 8 and 11~years - show a preference for relatively large numbers when choosing numbers 1-10. Adults show a preference for small numbers with the same response set. We report a modest association between children's age and numerical bias. However, children also exhibit a small number bias with a smaller response set available, and they show a preference specifically for the numbers 1-3 across many datasets. We argue that number space demonstrates both continuities (numbers 1-3 have a distinct status) and change (a developmentally emerging bias toward the left side of representational space or lower numbers).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.