Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39617847›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2024

Symbolic representations of infinity: the impact of notation and numerical syntax.

Ami Feder, Yair Graithzer, Michal Pinhas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 2024. 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
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  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

3 authors.

Ami FederDepartment of Psychology, Ariel University, 4070000, Ariel, Israel.
Yair GraithzerDepartment of Psychology, Ariel University, 4070000, Ariel, Israel.
Michal PinhasDepartment of Psychology, Ariel University, 4070000, Ariel, Israel. michalpi@ariel.ac.il.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9012-5461

Funding

Israel Science Foundation grant no. 1348/18
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Past research indicates that concepts of infinity are not fully understood. In countably infinite sets, infinity is presumed to be perceived as larger than any finite natural number. This study explored whether symbolic representations of infinity are processed as such through contrasts with Arabic and verbal written numbers. Comparisons between the infinity word and number words were responded to faster than comparisons of two number words, but not when the infinity symbol was solely compared to Arabic numbers. Moreover, infinity comparisons yielded distance-like effects, suggesting that infinity (both word and symbol) can be misconceived as a "natural number" closer to larger numbers than small ones. These findings demonstrate difficulty perceiving the physically smallest stimulus (∞) as the upper end-value and seem to reflect a limited understanding of symbolic forms of infinity among adults. They further highlight the impact of notation and numerical syntax on how we process symbolic numerical information.

Indexed as

MathematicsAdultComprehensionFemaleHumansMaleMathematical ConceptsPattern Recognition, VisualReaction TimeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39617847
PMCPMC11609123

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.