ArticleiScience2024
Magnitude shifts spatial attention from left to right in rhesus monkeys as in the human mental number line.
Article in iScience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Meta-analysis shows a malleable rightward bias in the expectations of objects in space.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Numbers Driving Space: Experience With Numerical Sequences Modulates Spatial Behavior in Newborn Chicks (Gallus gallus).Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026Article
- Spatial representation of magnitude in rhesus macaques: Investigating SNARC effects in quantity and size dimensions.Learning & behavior · 2026Article
- Prenatal light exposure affects number sense and the mental number line in young domestic chicks.eLife · 2025Article
- Crossing the Boundary: No Catastrophic Limits on Infants' Capacity to Represent Linguistic Sequences.Developmental science · 2025Article
- Does the Brain Care Which Direction We Read? A Cross-Cultural tDCS Study on Functional Lateralization of Number Processing.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Symbolic and non-symbolic numbers differently affect center identification in a number-line bisection task.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Humans typically represent numbers and quantities along a left-to-right continuum. Early perspectives attributed number-space association to culture; however, recent evidence in newborns and animals challenges this hypothesis. We investigate whether the length of an array of dots influences spatial bias in rhesus macaques. We designed a touch-screen task that required monkeys to remember the location of a target. At test, monkeys maintained high performance with arrays of 2, 4, 6, or 10 dots, regardless of changes in the array's location, spacing, and length. Monkeys remembered better left targets with 2-dot arrays and right targets with 6- or 10-dot arrays. Replacing the 10-dot array with a long bar, yielded more accurate performance with rightward locations, consistent with an underlying left-to-right oriented magnitude code. Our study supports the hypothesis of a spatially oriented mental magnitude line common to humans and animals, countering the idea that this code arises from uniquely human cultural learning.
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.