ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2016
Numbers in Action.
Review in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Same digits, different magnitudes: manual reaching unveils dual systems in symbolic number representation.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Kicking the mental number line: a kinematic investigation of numerical processing in childhood.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Electrophysiological Evidence for A Number-Action Mapping in Infancy.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Approach direction and accuracy, but not response times, show spatial-numerical association in chicks.PloS one · 2021Article
- How does number magnitude influence temporal and spatial parameters of eye movements?Experimental brain research · 2020Article
- Article
- The Developmental Trajectory of the Operational Momentum Effect.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
- Numerical Affordance Influences Action Execution: A Kinematic Study of Finger Movement.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
- Creating semantics in tool use.Cognitive processing · 2017Article
- Act on Numbers: Numerical Magnitude Influences Selection and Kinematics of Finger Movement.Frontiers in psychology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans show a remarkable tendency to describe and think of numbers as being placed on a mental number line (MNL), with smaller numbers located on the left and larger ones on the right. Faster responses to small numbers are indeed performed on the left side of space, while responses to large numbers are facilitated on the right side of space (spatial-numerical association of response codes, SNARC effect). This phenomenon is considered the experimental demonstration of the MNL and has been extensively replicated throughout a variety of paradigms. Nevertheless, the majority of previous literature has mainly investigated this effect by means of response times and accuracy, whereas studies considering more subtle and automatic measures such as kinematic parameters are rare (e.g., in a reaching-to-grasp movement, the grip aperture is enlarged in responding to larger numbers than in responding to small numbers). In this brief review we suggest that numerical magnitude can also affect the what and how of action execution (i.e., temporal and spatial components of movement). This evidence could have large implications in the strongly debated issue concerning the effect of experience and culture on the orientation of MNL.
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.