ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2022
Get in touch with numbers - an approximate number comparison task in the haptic modality.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2022. 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.
- Humans can sense large numbers of objects in a box by touch alone.Perception · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Approximate Number System (ANS) is conceptualized as an innate cognitive system that allows humans to perceive numbers of objects or events (>4) in a fuzzy, imprecise manner. The representation of numbers is assumed to be abstract and not bound to a particular sense. In the present study, we test the assumption of a shared cross-sensory system. We investigated approximate number processing in the haptic modality and compared performance to that of the visual modality. We used a dot comparison task (DCT), in which participants compare two dot arrays and decide which one contains more dots. In the haptic DCT, 67 participants had to compare two simultaneously presented dot arrays with the palms of their hands; in the visual DCT, participants inspected and compared dot arrays on a screen. Tested ratios ranged from 2.0 (larger/smaller number) to 1.1. As expected, in both the haptic and the visual DCT responses similarly depended on the ratio of the numbers of dots in the two arrays. However, on an individual level, we found evidence against medium or stronger positive correlations between "ANS acuity" in the visual and haptic DCTs. A regression model furthermore revealed that besides number, spacing-related features of dot patterns (e.g., the pattern's convex hull) contribute to the percept of numerosity in both modalities. Our results contradict the strong theory of the ANS solely processing number and being independent of a modality. According to our regression and response prediction model, our results rather point towards a modality-specific integration of number and number-related features.
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.