Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41688532›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Local/global visual processing impacts numerosity-magnitude conflict resolution.

Léa Chrétien, Nicolas Poirel, André Knops, Arnaud Viarouge

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Léa ChrétienUniversité Paris Cité, CNRS, LaPsyDÉ, F-75005, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-9931-4431
Nicolas PoirelUniversité Paris Cité, CNRS, LaPsyDÉ, F-75005, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3972-2575
André KnopsUniversité Paris Cité, CNRS, LaPsyDÉ, F-75005, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6357-9951
Arnaud ViarougeUniversité Paris Cité, CNRS, LaPsyDÉ, F-75005, Paris, France. arnaud.viarouge@u-paris.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6027-7093

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In non-symbolic numerical comparison tasks (Approximate Number System or ANS tasks) where participants determine which of two dot arrays is more numerous, judgments can be biased by irrelevant non-numerical dimensions of magnitude, such as dot size or the total occupied area. While inhibition may help overcome these conflicts, the mechanisms guiding attention toward relevant numerical information remain unclear. We hypothesized that modes of attentional processing - focusing on individual elements (local processing) versus the overall configuration (global processing) - may influence how participants resolve numerical conflicts. Fifty-four adults (Mage = 32.07 years, SD = 11.38) completed ANS trials preceded by prime items designed to activate either a local or global processing mode, or no prime in a control condition. Global priming did not significantly affect performance, while local priming modulated numerosity/magnitude conflicts across magnitude dimensions, notably reducing the impact of convex hull. These findings shed light on how perceptual modes impact adults’ ability to extract numerical information in the face of visual conflict.

Indexed as

Global/local processingNon-symbolic comparisonNumerical cognitionNumerical conflicts

Identifiers

PMID41688532
PMCPMC12992678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.