ArticlePsychological research2021
Symbol grounding of number words in the subitization range.
Article in Psychological research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Linguistic markedness and body specificity in parity judgments: evidence from a go/no-go task.Psychological research · 2024Article
- How quantifiers influence the conceptual representation of plurals.Memory & cognition · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In three experiments, we explored whether number words are grounded in a nonsymbolic representation of numerosity. We used a sentence-picture verification task, where participants are required to check whether the concept given in a sentence corresponds to the subsequently presented object. We concurrently manipulated numerical congruency by orthogonally varying the number word attached to the concept and the quantity of objects. The number words and numerosities varied from one to four in Experiment 1 and from six to nine in Experiment 2. In Experiment 3, we employed number words six and eight with the constraint that, in the incongruent condition, a constant number-to-numerosity ratio of 2:1 was used. In Experiment 1, we found that participants were faster and more efficient when concept-object matches were accompanied by numerical congruency relative to incongruency. On the other hand, no such difference was observed in Experiments 2 and 3 for numbers falling outside of the subitization range. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that number words from one to four are grounded in a nonsymbolic representation of the size of small sets.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31722039What 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.