ArticlePsychological research2020
Finger-counting habits, not finger movements, predict simple arithmetic problem solving.
Article in Psychological research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Processing of numerical representation of fingers depends on their location in space.Psychological research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous research in embodied mathematical cognition has found differences between those who start counting on their left hand and those who start counting on the right hand. However, if starting hand is a finger-embodied effect, then finger-specific interference may affect these differences between left and right starters. Furthermore, cultures that demonstrate different finger-counting habits may also be differently affected by this interference. In the current study, a total of 66 Canadians and 60 Chinese participants completed a single/dual-task paradigm and were also assessed on their starting hand for counting. The primary task was to verbally answer simple arithmetic problems, while the dual task was to either sequentially tap their fingers or their foot. Contrary to predictions, a specific finger-movement interference pattern that had previously been reported was not evident in this study, despite a much larger sample. Nevertheless, Canadians left starters outperformed right starters for every operation type, which may be further evidence of individual differences in the lateralization of arithmetic processes. Derived from a combination of a replication, a conceptual replication, and a cross-cultural comparison, this investigation suggests that embodied effects in the published literature are in need of both independent replication as well as investigation of individual differences. This study also further validates the differences between left and right starters, and suggests that more research is needed to understand the influence of embodied cognition on mathematical understanding.
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.