ArticleFrontiers in psychology2018
Task Constraints Affect Mapping From Approximate Number System Estimates to Symbolic Numbers.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Math language matters: math-specific verbal skills, not analog representation of non-symbolic magnitudes, predict symbolic fraction abilities in primary school children.Journal of experimental child psychology · 2025Article
- Non-symbolic estimation of big and small ratios with accurate and noisy feedback.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024Article
- More than the sum of its parts: Exploring the development of ratio magnitude versus simple magnitude perception.Developmental science · 2021Article
- Symbolic fractions elicit an analog magnitude representation in school-age children.Journal of experimental child psychology · 2020Article
- Malleability of mappings between Arabic numerals and approximate quantities: Factors underlying individual differences and the relation to math.Acta psychologica · 2019Article
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
The Approximate Number System (ANS) allows individuals to assess nonsymbolic numerical magnitudes (e.g., the number of apples on a tree) without counting. Several prominent theories posit that human understanding of symbolic numbers is based - at least in part - on mapping number symbols (e.g., 14) to their ANS-processed nonsymbolic analogs. Number-line estimation - where participants place numerical values on a bounded number-line - has become a key task used in research on this mapping. However, some research suggests that such number-line estimation tasks are actually proportion judgment tasks, as number-line estimation requires people to estimate the magnitude of the to-be-placed value, relative to set upper and lower endpoints, and thus do not so directly reflect magnitude representations. Here, we extend this work, assessing performance on nonsymbolic tasks that should more directly interface with the ANS. We compared adults' (
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.