ArticlePsychological research2021
Reading direction and spatial effects in parity and arithmetic tasks.
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 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perceived Motion and Operational Momentum: How Speed, Distance, and Time Influence Two-Digit Arithmetic.Frontiers in psychology · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigated the relationship between numerical and spatial processing and reading direction, conducting conceptual replications of the Shaki et al. (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 16(2): 328-331, 2009) parity task and the Mathieu et al. (Cognition 146: 229-239, 2016, Experiment 1) simple addition (e.g., 3 + 2) and subtraction (e.g., 3 - 2) task. Twenty-four left-to-right readers (LTR) and 24 right-to-left readers (RTL) were tested. The response time (RT) analysis of the parity task presented a robust spatial-numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect (left-side response advantage for smaller numbers and right-side advantage for larger numbers) for LTR but not RTL readers. In the arithmetic task, the three problem elements (e.g., 3 + 4) were presented sequentially with the second operand displaced slightly to the left or right of fixation. RTL but not LTR readers presented a RT advantage for subtraction relative to addition with a right-shifted second operand compared to it being left-shifted. This is consistent with a spatial bias linked to native reading direction. For both reading-direction groups, effects of the left vs. right side manipulation in the arithmetic or parity task did not correspond to parallel effects in the other task. The results imply that the parity-based SNARC effects and side-related effects in cognitive arithmetic are not equivalent measures of space-related processes in cognitive number processing and likely reflect distinct mechanisms.
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.