ArticleFrontiers in psychology2015
Up or down? Reading direction influences vertical counting direction in the horizontal plane - a cross-cultural comparison.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Number comparison in bilinguals is not affected by their second language.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Spatial representation of serial order in working memory: a cross-cultural comparison between Japanese and Italian adults.Psychological research · 2026Article
- Does the Brain Care Which Direction We Read? A Cross-Cultural tDCS Study on Functional Lateralization of Number Processing.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Practice-induced SNARC: evidence from a null-SNARC sample.Cognitive processing · 2024Article
- Vertical and horizontal reading training in patients with hemianopia and its effect on reading eye movements.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Probing the Dual-Route Model of the SNARC Effect by Orthogonalizing Processing Speed and Depth.Experimental psychology · 2023Article
- The role of perceptual and action effector strength of graphs and bases of mathematical metaphors in the metaphorical processing of mathematical concepts.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Eye Tracking Lateralized Spatial Associations in Early Childhood.Journal of cognition and development : official journal of the Cognitive Development Society · 2021Article
- Consumer Decision-Making Creativity and Its Relation to Exploitation-Exploration Activities: Eye-Tracking Approach.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Mental Number Representations in 2D Space.Frontiers in psychology · 2019Article
- Observation of directional storybook reading influences young children's counting direction.Journal of experimental child psychology · 2018Article
- Counting on the mental number line to make a move: sensorimotor ('pen') control and numerical processing.Experimental brain research · 2017Article
- Number-space associations without language: Evidence from preverbal human infants and non-human animal species.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2017Review
- Exploring the numerical mind by eye-tracking: a special issue.Psychological research · 2016Article
- Composite body movements modulate numerical cognition: evidence from the motion-numerical compatibility effect.Frontiers in psychology · 2015Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Most adults and children in cultures where reading text progresses from left to right also count objects from the left to the right side of space. The reverse is found in cultures with a right-to-left reading direction. The current set of experiments investigated whether vertical counting in the horizontal plane is also influenced by reading direction. Participants were either from a left-to-right reading culture (UK) or from a mixed (left-to-right and top-to-bottom) reading culture (Hong Kong). In Experiment 1, native English-speaking children and adults and native Cantonese-speaking children and adults performed three object counting tasks. Objects were presented flat on a table in a horizontal, vertical, and square display. Independent of culture, the horizontal array was mostly counted from left to right. While the majority of English-speaking children counted the vertical display from bottom to top, the majority of the Cantonese-speaking children as well as both Cantonese- and English-speaking adults counted the vertical display from top to bottom. This pattern was replicated in the counting pattern for squares: all groups except the English-speaking children started counting with the top left coin. In Experiment 2, Cantonese-speaking adults counted a square array of objects after they read a text presented to them either in left-to-right or in top-to-bottom reading direction. Most Cantonese-speaking adults started counting the array by moving horizontally from left to right. However, significantly more Cantonese-speaking adults started counting with a top-to-bottom movement after reading the text presented in a top-to-bottom reading direction than in a left-to-right reading direction. Our results show clearly that vertical counting in the horizontal plane is influenced by longstanding as well as more recent experience of reading direction.
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.