ArticlePsychological research2021
Processing of numerical representation of fingers depends on their location in space.
Article in Psychological research, 2021. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fingers can express quantities and thus contribute to the acquisition and manipulation of numbers as well as the development of arithmetical skills. As embodied entities, the processing of finger numerical configurations should, therefore, be facilitated when they match shared cultural representations and are presented close to the body. To investigate these issues, the present study investigated whether canonical finger configurations are processed faster than noncanonical configurations or spatially matched dot configurations, taking into account their location in the peripersonal or the extrapersonal space. Analysis of verbal responses to the enumeration of small and large numerosities showed that participants (N = 30) processed small numerosities faster than large ones and dots faster than finger configurations despite visuo-spatial matching. Canonical configurations were also processed faster than noncanonical configurations but for finger numerical stimuli only. Furthermore, the difference in response time between dots and fingers processing was greater when the stimuli were located in the peripersonal space than in the extrapersonal space. As a whole, the data suggest that, due to their motor nature, finger numerical configurations are not processed as simple visual stimuli but in relation to corporal and cultural counting habits, in agreement with the embodied framework of numerical cognition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33125507What 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.