ArticleCognition2021
The relative salience of numerical and non-numerical dimensions shifts over development: A re-analysis of.
Article in Cognition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Segmentation as a bottleneck in numerical cognition.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Seeing Flames, Perceiving Quantity: Approximations of Fire Intensity Across Development.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Intersection of spatial and numerical cognition in the developing brain.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025Article
- Electrophysiological Comparison of Cumulative Area and Non-Symbolic Number Judgments.Brain sciences · 2023Article
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
Abstract
Visual displays of objects include information about number and other magnitudes such as cumulative surface area. Despite the confluence of cues, a prevalent view is that number is uniquely salient within multidimensional stimuli. Consistent with this view, Tomlinson et al. (2020) report that, in addition to greater acuity for number than area among both children and adults, number biases area judgments more than the reverse, at least in childhood. However, a failure to consider perceived area, undermines these results. To address this concern, we used an index of perceived area when assessing acuity and bias of number and area. In this context, number and area were comparable in acuity among children and adults. Bias, however, differed across development. Although adults showed greater bias of number on area judgments than the reverse, children experienced greater area bias on number judgments. Thus, contra Tomlinson et al., when differences in mathematical and perceived area are accounted for, area is more salient than number early in development. However, number does become the more salient dimension by adulthood, suggesting a role for experience with symbolic number and education in directing attention towards number within multidimensional visual stimuli.
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.