ArticlePsychological research2024
Number, size, and space associated in a common system by distinct mechanisms.
Article in Psychological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
The spatial numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect demonstrates that people respond faster to small numbers with their left hand and faster to large numbers with their right hand. The size congruity effect (SCE) refers to the fact that congruent trials between numerical values and physical sizes are faster than incongruent trials. Previous studies have found that the SNARC effect and SCE are independent when magnitudes or sizes are processed explicitly. This study aimed to explore whether number, size, and space are common and distinct mechanisms using an implicit parity judgment task. The results showed that the SNARC effect, SCE, and SNARC-like effect all co-existed. Furthermore, there was a significant interaction between the SNARC effect and SCE, in which the SNARC effect in the SCE-congruent condition was larger than in the SCE-incongruent condition, whereas SCE merely emerged in the SNARC-compatible trials. However, participants responded to small numbers in large size faster than to large numbers in small size with the left hand in SCE-incongruent trials, which reflected that number-space mapping (SNARC effect) was stronger than size-space mapping (SNARC-like effect). These findings provide new evidence for A Theory of Magnitude (ATOM), which suggests that number, size, and space are associated with a common generalized magnitude system through distinct mechanisms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39636408What 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.