Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36436087›Full record

ArticleAnimal cognition2023

The influence of visual illusion perception on numerosity estimation could be evolutionarily conserved: exploring the numerical Delboeuf illusion in humans (Homo sapiens) and fish (Poecilia reticulata).

Maria Santacà, Umberto Granziol

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Animal cognition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 40% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maria SantacàDepartment of Biology, University of Padova, Viale Giuseppe Colombo 3 - Via Ugo Bassi 58/B, 35131, Padua, Italy. maria.santaca@unipd.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6590-3831
Umberto GranziolDepartment of General Psychology, University of Padova, Padua, Italy.
University of Padua · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Discriminating between different quantities is an essential ability in daily life that has been demonstrated in a variety of non-human vertebrates. Nonetheless, what drives the estimation of numerosity is not fully understood, as numerosity intrinsically covaries with several other physical characteristics. There is wide debate as to whether the numerical and spatial abilities of vertebrates are processed by a single magnitude system or two different cognitive systems. Adopting a novel approach, we aimed to investigate this issue by assessing the interaction between area size and numerosity, which has never been conceptualized with consideration for subjective experience in non-human animals. We examined whether the same perceptual biases underlying one of the best-known size illusions, the Delboeuf illusion, can be also identified in numerical estimation tasks. We instructed or trained human participants and guppies, small teleost fish, to select a target numerosity (larger or smaller) of squares between two sets that actually differed in their numerosity. Subjects were also presented with illusory trials in which the same numerosity was presented in two different contexts, against a large and a small background, resembling the Delboeuf illusion. In these trials, both humans and fish demonstrated numerical biases in agreement with the perception of the classical version of the Delboeuf illusion, with the array perceived as larger appearing more numerous. Thus, our results support the hypothesis of a single magnitude system, as perceptual biases that influence spatial decisions seem to affect numerosity judgements in the same way.

Indexed as

IllusionsPoeciliaAnimalsBiasHumansJudgmentVisual PerceptionComparative psychologyMagnitude estimationNon-symbolic numerical abilitiesNumerosityVisual illusion

Identifiers

PMID36436087
OpenAlexW4310276614

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.