Mental Numerosity Line in the Human's Approximate Number System

What makes different number-space mappings interact?

Models of numerical cognition consider a visuo-spatial representation to be at the core of numerical processing, the 'mental number line'. Two main interference effects between number and space have been described: the SNARC effect reflects a small number/left side and large number/right side association (number-location mapping); the size-congruity effect (SCE) reflects a small number/small size and large number/large size association (number-size mapping). Critically, a thorough investigation on the representational source for these two number-space mappings is lacking, leaving open the question of whether the same representation underlies both phenomena. Here, we build on a recent study (Viarouge and de Hevia in Front Hum Neurosci 15:750964, 2021) in order to address this question in three experiments, by systematically manipulating the presence of the two conditions that might elicit an interaction between SNARC and SCE: (i) an implicit task whereby numerical and spatial information are task-irrelevant, (ii) a design in which the number-space congruency relative to both mappings vary at the same level -either both within or between blocks. Experiment 1 replicated the interaction between the two mappings when both factors were present. Experiments 2 and 3 dissociated the two factors by varying the two mappings at the same level but using an explicit comparison task (Experiment 2), or by using an implicit task but with mappings varying at different levels (Experiment 3). We found that both factors, either in combination or used in isolation, drive the interaction between the two number-space mappings. These findings are discussed in terms of the weight given to each mapping, suggesting that a single representation encompassing both number-space mappings is therefore activated whenever both mappings are given equal weight through task requirements.

The interplay of motor adaptation and groupitizing in numerosity perception: Insights from visual motion adaptation and proprioceptive motor adaptation

Groupitizing is a well-established strategy in numerosity perception that enhances speed and sensory precision. Building on the ATOM theory, Anobile proposed the sensorimotor numerosity system, which posits a strong link between number and action. Previous studies using motor adaptation technology have shown that high-frequency motor adaptation leads to underestimation of numerosity perception, while low-frequency adaptation leads to overestimation. However, the impact of motor adaptation on groupitizing, and whether visual motion adaptation produces similar effects, remain unclear. In this study, we investigate the persistence of the advantage of groupitizing after motor adaptation and explore the effects of visual motion adaptation. Surprisingly, our findings reveal that proprioceptive motor adaptation weakens the advantage of groupitizing, indicating a robust effect of motor adaptation even when groupitizing is employed. Moreover, we observe a bidirectional relationship, as groupitizing also weakens the adaptation effect. These results highlight the complex interplay between motor adaptation and groupitizing in numerosity perception. Furthermore, our study provides evidence that visual motion adaptation also has an adaptation effect, but does not fully replicate the effects of proprioceptive motor adaptation on groupitizing. In conclusion, our research underscores the importance of groupitizing as a valuable strategy in numerosity perception, and sheds light on the influence of motion adaptation on this strategy.

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

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.

Spatial frequency equalization does not prevent spatial–numerical associations

There is an intense debate surrounding the origin of spatial–numerical associations (SNAs), according to which small numbers are mapped onto the left side of the space and large numbers onto the right. Despite evidence suggesting that SNAs would emerge as an innate predisposition to map numerical information onto a left-to-right spatially oriented mental representation, alternative accounts have challenged these proposals, maintaining that such a mapping would be the result of a mere spatial frequency (SF) coding of any visual image. That is, any smaller or larger array of objects would naturally contain more low or high SF information and, accordingly, each hemisphere would be preferentially tuned only for one SF range (e.g., right hemisphere tuned for low SF and left hemisphere tuned for high SF). This would determine the typical SNA (e.g., faster RTs for small numerical arrays with the left hand and for large numerical arrays with the right hand). To directly probe the role of SF coding in SNAs, we tested participants in a typical dot-arrays comparison task with two numerical sets: one in which SFs were confounded with numerosity (Experiment 1) and one in which the full SF power spectrum was equalized across all stimuli, keeping this cue uninformative about numerosity (Experiment 2). We found that SNAs emerged in both experiments, independently of whether SF was confounded or not with numerosity. Taken together, these findings suggest that SNAs cannot simply originate from SF power spectrum alone, and, thus, they rule out the brain’s asymmetric SF tuning as a primary cause of such an effect.

Cultural factors weaken but do not reverse left-to-right spatial biases in numerosity processing: Data from Arabic and English monoliterates and Arabic-English biliterates

Directional response biases due to a conceptual link between space and number, such as a left-to-right hand bias for increasing numerical magnitude, are known as the SNARC (Spatial-Numerical Association of Response Codes) effect. We investigated how the SNARC effect for numerosities would be influenced by reading-writing direction, task instructions, and ambient visual environment in four literate populations exemplifying opposite reading-writing cultures-namely, Arabic (right-to-left script) and English (left-to-right script). Monoliterates and biliterates in Jordan and the U.S. completed a speeded numerosity comparison task to assess the directionality and magnitude of a SNARC effect in their numerosity processing. Monoliterates' results replicated previously documented effects of reading-writing direction and task instructions: the SNARC effect found in left-to-right readers was weakened in right-to-left readers, and the left-to-right group exhibited a task-dependency effect (SNARC effect in the smaller condition, reverse SNARC effect in the larger condition). Biliterates' results did not show a clear effect of environment; instead, both biliterate groups resembled English monoliterates in showing a left-to-right, task-dependent SNARC effect, albeit weaker than English monoliterates'. The absence of significant biases in all Arabic-reading groups (biliterates and Arabic monoliterates) points to a potential conflict between distinct spatial-numerical mapping codes. This view is explained in terms of the proposed Multiple Competing Codes Theory (MCCT), which posits three distinct spatial-numerical mapping codes (innate, cardinal, ordinal) during numerical processing-each involved at varying levels depending on individual and task factors.

Can a Single Representational Object Account for Different Number-Space Mappings?

Numbers are mapped onto space from birth on, as evidenced by a variety of interactions between the processing of numerical and spatial information. In particular, larger numbers are associated to larger spatial extents (number/spatial extent mapping) and to rightward spatial locations (number/location mapping), and smaller numbers are associated to smaller spatial extents and leftward spatial locations. These two main types of number/space mappings (number/spatial extent and number/location mappings) are usually assumed to reflect the fact that numbers are represented on an internal continuum: the mental number line. However, to date there is very little evidence that these two mappings actually reflect a single representational object. Across two experiments in adults, we investigated the interaction between number/location and number/spatial extent congruency effects, both when numbers were presented in a non-symbolic and in a symbolic format. We observed a significant interaction between the two mappings, but only in the context of an implicit numerical task. The results were unaffected by the format of presentation of numbers. We conclude that the number/location and the number/spatial extent mappings can stem from the activation of a single representational object, but only in specific experimental contexts.

Grouping strategies in numerosity perception between intrinsic and extrinsic grouping cues

The number of items in an array can be quickly and accurately estimated by dividing the array into subgroups, in a strategy termed "groupitizing." For example, when memorizing a telephone number, it is better to do so by divide the number into several segments. Different forms of visual grouping can affect the precision of the enumeration of a large set of items. Previous studies have found that when groupitizing, enumeration precision is improved by grouping arrays using visual proximity and color similarity. Based on Gestalt theory, Palmer (Cognit Psychol 24:436, 1992) divided perceptual grouping into intrinsic (e.g., proximity, similarity) and extrinsic (e.g., connectedness, common region) principles. Studies have investigated groupitizing effects on intrinsic grouping. However, to the best of our knowledge, no study has explored groupitizing effects for extrinsic grouping cues. Therefore, this study explored whether extrinsic grouping cues differed from intrinsic grouping cues for groupitizing effects in numerosity perception. The results showed that both extrinsic and intrinsic grouping cues improved enumeration precision. However, extrinsic grouping was more accurate in terms of the sensory precision of the numerosity perception.

Perceiving numerosity does not cause automatic shifts of spatial attention

It is debated whether the representation of numbers is endowed with a directional-spatial component so that perceiving small-magnitude numbers triggers leftward shifts of attention and perceiving large-magnitude numbers rightward shifts. Contrary to initial findings, recent investigations have demonstrated that centrally presented small-magnitude and large-magnitude Arabic numbers do not cause leftward and rightward shifts of attention, respectively. Here we verified whether perceiving small or large non-symbolic numerosities (i.e., clouds of dots) drives attention to the left or the right side of space, respectively. In experiment 1, participants were presented with central small (1, 2) vs large-numerosity (8, 9) clouds of dots followed by an imperative target in the left or right side of space. In experiment 2, a central cloud of dots (i.e., five dots) was followed by the simultaneous presentation of two identical dot-clouds, one on the left and one on the right side of space. Lateral clouds were both lower (1, 2) or higher in numerosity (8, 9) than the central cloud. After a variable delay, one of the two lateral clouds turned red and participants had to signal the colour change through a unimanual response. We found that (a) in Experiment 1, the small vs large numerosity of the central cloud of dots did not speed up the detection of left vs right targets, respectively, (b) in Experiment 2, the detection of colour change was not faster in the left side of space when lateral clouds were smaller in numerosity than the central reference and in the right side when clouds were larger in numerosity. These findings show that perceiving non-symbolic numerosity does not cause automatic shifts of spatial attention and suggests no inherent association between the representation of numerosity and that of directional space.

Non-symbolic and symbolic number lines are dissociated

People use mental number lines for both symbolic numerals and numerosity, but little is known about how these two mental number lines are related. The current study investigated the association in effect size, directionality of the mental number line, and development between symbolic and non-symbolic mental number lines to determine if they were related to or independent from each other. We collected data from numerosity- and digit-matching tasks that used the following numbers: 11, 14, 17, 20, 23, 26, and 29. Tasks were performed by college undergraduates and the fifth-grade primary school students. The results showed that none of the effects for non-symbolic numbers was related to any of the effects for symbolic numbers, and vice versa, in both adults and children. Another notable finding was that the correlation between the SNARC (spatial-numerical association of response code) effect size and mathematical ability was negative in the adult group. These results are consistent with the dissociated processes hypothesis and suggest that mental number lines are notation-dependent. As shown by the SNARC effect, the mental number line might result in interference in the current task by an automatically activated spatial notation-dependent representation of numbers.

The Brain’s Asymmetric Frequency Tuning: Asymmetric Behavior Originates from Asymmetric Perception

To construct a coherent multi-modal percept, vertebrate brains extract low-level features (such as spatial and temporal frequencies) from incoming sensory signals. However, because frequency processing is lateralized with the right hemisphere favouring low frequencies while the left favours higher frequencies, this introduces asymmetries between the hemispheres. Here, we describe how this lateralization shapes the development of several cognitive domains, ranging from visuo-spatial and numerical cognition to language, social cognition, and even aesthetic appreciation, and leads to the emergence of asymmetries in behaviour. We discuss the neuropsychological and educational implications of these emergent asymmetries and suggest future research approaches.

SNARC effect modulated by central executive control: revealed in a cue-based trisection task

People respond to small numbers faster with the left hand and respond to large numbers faster with the right hand, a phenomenon known as the Spatial-Numerical Association of Response Codes (SNARC) effect. Whether the SNARC effect originates from culturally determined long-term experience or the task-set-influenced temporary associations among spaces, locations, and numerical magnitudes in working memory (WM) is still controversial. In the present study, we used a trisection paradigm in which numbers were divided into three categories (small: 1, 2; middle: 4, 5, 6; and large: 8, 9) to explore whether the central executive control can modulate the SNARC effect. Participants were serially presented with a cue and a target number. The cue denoted a task rule, which informed participants to compare the target number with either 3 or 7. The cue was either switched or repeated across trials. We found that the SNARC effects were observed in the cue-switching condition. In the cue-repeat condition, the SNARC effect disappeared. These findings suggest that the SNARC effect is modulated by set-shifting-related central executive control in WM, supporting the view that the SNARC effect is WM-dependent.

Non-symbolic numerosities do not automatically activate spatial-numerical associations: Evidence from the SNARC effect

The SNARC (spatial-numerical association of response codes) effect is the finding that people are generally faster to respond to smaller numbers with left-sided responses and larger numbers with right-sided responses. The SNARC effect has been widely reported for responses to symbolic representations of number such as digits. However, there is mixed evidence as to whether it occurs for non-symbolic representations of number, particularly when magnitude is irrelevant to the task. Mitchell et al. reported a SNARC effect when participants were asked to make orientation decisions to arrays of one-to-nine triangles (pointing upwards vs. pointing downwards) and concluded that SNARC effects occur for non-symbolic, non-canonical representations of number. They additionally reported that this effect was stronger in the subitising range. However, here we report four experiments that do not replicate either of these findings. Participants made upwards/inverted decisions to one-to-nine triangles where total surface area was either controlled across numerosities (Experiments 1, 2, and 4) or increased congruently with numerosity (Experiment 3). There was no evidence of a SNARC effect either across the full range or within the subset of the subitising range. The results of Experiment 4 (in which we presented the original stimuli of Mitchell et al.) suggested that visual properties of non-symbolic displays can prompt SNARC-like effects driven by visual cues rather than numerosity. Taken in the context of other recent findings, we argue that non-symbolic representations of number do not offer a direct and automatic route to numerical-spatial associations.

Order versus chaos: The impact of structure on number-space associations

The Spatial-Numerical Association of Response Codes (SNARC) effect has been observed with different stimuli, beside Arabic numerals, such as written/spoken number words, sequences of acoustic stimuli, and groups of elements. Here we investigated how the enumeration of sets of elements can be affected by the spatial configuration of the displayed stimuli with regard to the emergence of the SNARC effect. To this aim, we asked participants to perform a magnitude comparison task with structured (i.e., dice-like) and unstructured (i.e., random) patterns of rectangles. With this manipulation, we sought to explore the presence of the SNARC effect in relation to the structure of the displayed visual stimuli. The results showed that the spatial arrangement of rectangles does not impact visual enumeration processes leading to the SNARC effect. An unexpected reversal of the size effect for unstructured stimuli was also observed. We speculate that the presence of a similar SNARC effect, both with structured and unstructured stimuli, indicates the existence of a common access to the mental number line.

Non-symbolic magnitudes are represented spatially: Evidence from a non-symbolic SNARC task

A core proposition in numerical cognition is numbers are represented spatially. Evidence for this proposition comes from the "spatial numerical association of response codes" effect (SNARC) in which faster responses are made by the left/right hand judging whether one of a pair of Arabic digits is smaller/larger than the other. Less is known if a similar SNARC effect exists for non-symbolic magnitudes; and research that has been conducted used stimuli which could be translated into symbolic terms. To overcome this limitation, we employed a referent-to-target judgment paradigm in which a referent dot array (n = 30 dots) was follow by a second array of dots (e.g., n = 45 or 15 dots)-participants judged if the second array contained fewer or more dots than the referent array. Dot arrays with fewer dots were judged more quickly with the left hand compared to the right hand (i.e., a SNARC effect). Not all participants demonstrated a SNARC effect, however. Neither visuospatial working memory nor math ability was associated with the presence/absence of a non-symbolic SNARC effect. Implications of the non-symbolic SNARC effect for accounts of numerical cognition are discussed.