Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29515382›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2018

Spatial Arrangement and Set Size Influence the Coding of Non-symbolic Quantities in the Intraparietal Sulcus.

Johannes Bloechle, Julia F Huber, Elise Klein, Julia Bahnmueller, Johannes Rennig, Korbinian Moeller, Stefan Huber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Lesion-symptom mapping reveals differential relationships between language and precise versus approximate numeracy.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Do Domestic Dogs (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Johannes BloechleNeurocognition Lab, Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, Knowledge Media Research Center, Tübingen, Germany.
Julia F HuberNeurocognition Lab, Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, Knowledge Media Research Center, Tübingen, Germany.
Elise KleinNeurocognition Lab, Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, Knowledge Media Research Center, Tübingen, Germany.
Julia BahnmuellerNeurocognition Lab, Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, Knowledge Media Research Center, Tübingen, Germany.
Johannes RennigNeurocognition Lab, Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, Knowledge Media Research Center, Tübingen, Germany.
Korbinian MoellerNeurocognition Lab, Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, Knowledge Media Research Center, Tübingen, Germany.
Stefan HuberNeurocognition Lab, Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, Knowledge Media Research Center, Tübingen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Performance in visual quantification tasks shows two characteristic patterns as a function of set size. A precise subitizing process for small sets (up to four) was contrasted with an approximate estimation process for larger sets. The spatial arrangement of elements in a set also influences visual quantification performance, with frequently perceived arrangements (e.g., dice patterns) being faster enumerated than random arrangements. Neuropsychological and imaging studies identified the intraparietal sulcus (IPS), as key brain area for quantification, both within and above the subitizing range. However, it is not yet clear if and how set size and spatial arrangement of elements in a set modulate IPS activity during quantification. In an fMRI study, participants enumerated briefly presented dot patterns with random, canonical or dice arrangement within and above the subitizing range. We evaluated how activity amplitude and pattern in the IPS were influenced by size and spatial arrangement of a set. We found a discontinuity in the amplitude of IPS response between subitizing and estimation range, with steep activity increase for sets exceeding four elements. In the estimation range, random dot arrangements elicited stronger IPS response than canonical arrangements which in turn elicited stronger response than dice arrangements. Furthermore, IPS activity patterns differed systematically between arrangements. We found a signature in the IPS response for a transition between subitizing and estimation processes during quantification. Differences in amplitude and pattern of IPS activity for different spatial arrangements indicated a more precise representation of non-symbolic numerical magnitude for dice and canonical than for random arrangements. These findings challenge the idea of an abstract coding of numerosity in the IPS even within a single notation.

Indexed as

approximate number systemIPSnon-symbolic magnitudenumerical cognitionsubitizing

Identifiers

PMID29515382
PMCPMC5826250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.