Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36650364›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2023

Contrasting symbolic and non-symbolic numerical representations in a joint classification task.

Valter Prpic, Yasmine A Basamh, Courtney M Goodridge, Tiziano Agostini, Mauro Murgia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors.

Valter PrpicDepartment of Philosophy and Communication Studies, University of Bologna, Via Azzo Gardino 23, Bologna, Italy. valter.prpic@unibo.it.
Yasmine A BasamhInstitute for Psychological Sciences, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK.
Courtney M GoodridgeInstitute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Tiziano AgostiniDepartment of Life Sciences, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy.
Mauro MurgiaDepartment of Life Sciences, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Both symbolic (digits) and non-symbolic (dots) numerals are spatially coded, with relatively small numbers being responded faster with a left key and large numbers being responded faster with a right key (spatial-numerical association of response codes [SNARC]). The idea of format independent SNARC seems to support the existence of a common system for symbolic and non-symbolic numerical representations, although evidence in the field is still mixed. The aim of the present study is to investigate whether symbolic and non-symbolic numerals interact in the SNARC effect when both information is simultaneously displayed. To do so, participants were presented with dice-like patterns, with digits being used instead of dots. In two separate magnitude classification tasks, participants had to respond either to the number of digits presented on the screen or to their numerical size. In the non-symbolic task, they had to judge whether the digits on the screen were more or less than three, irrespective of the numerical value of the digits. In the symbolic task, participants had to judge whether the digits on the screen were numerically smaller or larger than three, irrespective of the number of digits being present. The results show a consistent SNARC effect in the symbolic task and no effect in the non-symbolic one. Furthermore, congruency between symbolic and non-symbolic numerals did not modulate the response patterns, thus supporting the idea of independent representations and questioning some propositions of current theoretical accounts.

Indexed as

Space PerceptionHumansReaction TimeApproximate number systemA theory of magnitudeDigitNumerositySNARCWorking memory

Identifiers

PMID36650364
PMCPMC10482780

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.