ArticlePloS one2019
Development of number-space associations: SNARC effects and spatial attention in 7- to 11-year-olds.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The spatial numerical association of response codes effect, referred to as the SNARC effect, reveals that small numbers elicit faster left than right responses, and conversely, large numbers elicit faster right responses. Here, we explored the development of this number-space association by assessing how 7-, 9-, 11-year-olds, and adults differed in spatial orienting of attention on Posner' paradigm. Compared with the previous research, we examined how the cues would affect the level and strength of the SNARC effect in children under the different attentional conditions. Subjects made parity decisions for endogenous attention (Experiment 1) and exogenous attention (Experiment 2). The results showed that adults displayed the SNARC effect in both experiments, relatively speaking, 7- to 11-year-old Chinese children's ability of spatial numerical association progressed gradually. With endogenous attention, the SNARC effect appeared in all age groups except for 7-year-olds for invalid cues. Compared with the endogenous attention condition, the SNARC effect was more significantly affected by cues in the exogenous attention condition. This result might be owing to the fact that the SNARC effect was not demonstrated in 7-year-olds with either valid or invalid cues. Our results suggest that the differences in the spatial orienting of attention are based on the cognitive load associated with processing number information and that this process can be affected by cues. Further, there may be cross-cultural influences on the SNARC effect, as early family training may explain the results seen in this sample of Chinese 7-year-olds. Thus, reaction times decreased with increasing age in the parity judgment task, and reaction times for valid cues were faster than for invalid cues regardless of the age group in both experiments. The SNARC effect was only present for 7-year-olds for valid cues, for endogenous attention.
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.