Exploring the mental number line: Evidence from a dual-task paradigm

Psychological Research

Volumn 71, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 598-613

  Müller, Dana ^a   Schwarz, Wolf ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF POTSDAM   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COGNITION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HEARING; HUMAN; MALE; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PSYCHOLOGIC TEST; PSYCHOLOGICAL REFRACTORY PERIOD;

ADULT; COGNITION; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; PITCH PERCEPTION; PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; REFRACTORY PERIOD, PSYCHOLOGICAL;

EID: 34547751454     PISSN: 03400727     EISSN: 14302772     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-006-0070-6     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Bishop, Y. M. M., Fienberg, S. E., & Holland, P. W. (1975). Discrete multivariate analysis. Cambridge: MIT Press.
2. Brannon, E. M. (2005). What animals know about numbers. In: J. I. D. Campbell (Ed.), Handbook of mathematical cognition (pp. 85-107). New York: Psychology Press.
3. Caessens, B., Hommel, B., Reynvoet, B., & van der Goten, K. (2004). Backward-compatibility effects with irrelevant stimulus-response overlap: The case of the SNARC effect. Journal of General Psychology, 13, 411-425.
4. Campbell, J. I. D. (Ed.). (2005). Handbook of mathematical cognition. New York: Psychology Press.
5. De Jong, R. (1993). Multiple bottlenecks in overlapping task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 965-980.
6. Dehaene, S. (1996). The organization of brain activations in number comparison: Event-related potential and the additive-factors method. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 47-68.
7. Dehaene, S. (1997). The number sense. How the mind creates mathematics. New York: Oxford University Press.
8. Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 371-396.
9. Dehaene, S., Molko, N., Cohen, L., & Wilson, A. J. (2004). Arithmetic and the brain. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 14, 218-224.
10. Fias, W. (2001). Two routes for the processing of verbal numbers: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Psychological Research, 65, 250-259.
11. Fias, W., & Fischer, M. H. (2005). Spatial representation of numbers. In: J. I. D. Campbell (Ed.), Handbook of mathematical cognition (pp. 43-54). New York: Psychology Press.
12. Fias, W., Brysbaert, M., Geypens, F., & d'Ydewalle, G. (1996). The importance of magnitude information in numerical processing: Evidence from the SNARC-effect. Mathematical Cognition, 2, 95-110.
13. Fias, W., Lauwereyns, J., & Lammertyn, J. (2001). Irrelevant digits affect feature-based attention depending on the overlap of neural circuits. Cognitive Brain Research, 12, 415-423.
14. Fischer, M. H. (2003). Spatial representation in number processing-evidence from a pointing task. Visual Cognition, 10, 493-508.
15. Fischer, M. H., Castel, A. D., Dodd, M. D., & Pratt, J. (2003). Perceiving numbers causes spatial shifts of attention. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 555-556.
16. Fischer, M. H., Warlop, N., Hill, R. L., & Fias, W. (2004). Oculomotor bias induced by number perception. Experimental Psychology, 51, 91-97.
17. Gallistel, C. R., & Gelman, R. (2000). Non-verbal numerical cognition: From reals to integers. Trends in Cognitive Neuroscience, 4, 59-65.
18. Gevers, W., Reynvoet, B., & Fias, W. (2003). The mental representation of ordinal sequences is spatially organized. Cognition, 87, B87-B95.
19. Gevers, W., Ratinckx, E., De Baene, W., & Fias, W. (2006). Further evidence that the SNARC effect is processed along a dual-route architecture: Evidence from the lateralized readiness potential. Experimental Psychology, 53, 58-68.
20. Hubbard, E. M., Piazza, M., Pinel, P., & Dehaene, S. (2005). Interactions between number and space in parietal cortex. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6, 435-448.
21. Keus, I. M., & Schwarz, W. (2005). Searching for the functional locus of the SNARC effect: Evidence for a response-related origin. Memory & Cognition, 33, 681-695.
22. Keus, I. M., Jenks, K. M., & Schwarz, W. (2005). Psychophysiological evidence that the SNARC effect has its functional locus in a response selection stage. Cognitive Brain Research, 24, 48-56.
23. Lorch, R. F., Jr., & Meyers, J. L. (1990). Regression analyses of repeated measures data in cognition research. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 149-157.
24. Mapelli, D., Rusconi, E., & Umiltà, C. (2003). The SNARC effect: An instance of the Simon effect? Cognition, 88, B1-B10.
25. McCann, R. S., & Johnston, J. C. (1992). Locus of the single-channel bottleneck in dual-task interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 471-484.
26. McCann, R. S., Remington, R. W., & Van Selst, M. (2000). A dual-task investigation of automaticity in visual word processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1352-1370.
27. Miller, J., & Reynolds, A. (2003). The locus of redundant-targets and nontargets effects: Evidence from the Psychological Refractory Period paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 1126-1142.
28. Moyer, R. S., & Landauer, T. K. (1967). Time required for judgments of numerical inequality. Nature, 215, 1519-1520.
29. Nuerk, H.-C., Iversen, W., & Willmes, K. (2004). Notational modulation of the SNARC effect and the MARC (linguistic markedness of response codes) effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A, 835-863.
30. Nuerk, H.-C., Wood, G., & Willmes, K. (2005). The universal SNARC effect. The association between number magnitude and space is amodal. Experimental Psychology, 52, 187-194.
31. Oriet, C., Tombu, M., & Jolicœur, P. (2005). Symbolic distance affects two processing loci in the number comparison task. Memory & Cognition, 33, 913-926.
32. Otten, L. J., Sudevan, P., Logan, G. D., & Coles, M. G. H. (1996). Magnitude versus parity in numerical judgments: Event-related brain potentials implicate response conflict as the source of interference. Acta Psychologica, 94, 21-40.
33. Pashler, H. (1984). Processing stages in overlapping tasks: Evidence for a central bottleneck. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 358-377.
34. Pashler, H. (1993a). Doing two things at the same time. American Scientist, 81, 48-55.
35. Pashler, H. (1993b). Dual-task interference and elementary mental mechanisms. In D. Meyer & S. Kornblum (Eds.), Attention and performance XIV (pp. 245-264). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
36. Pashler, H. (1994). Dual task interference in simple tasks: Eata and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220-244.
37. Pashler, H. (1998). The psychology of attention. London: The MIT Press.
38. Pashler, H., & Johnston, J. C. (1998). Attentional limitations in dual-task performance. In: H. Pashler (Ed.), Attention (pp.155-189). Hove: Psychology Press.
39. Pinel, P., Dehaene, S., Rivière, D., & LeBihan, D. (2001). Modulation of parietal activation by semantic distance in a number comparison task. NeuroImage, 14, 1013-1026.
40. Restle, F. (1970). Speed of adding and comparing numbers. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 83, 274-278.
41. Schwarz, W., & Ischebeck, A. (2001). On the interpretation of response time vs. onset asynchrony functions: Application to dual-task and precue-utilization paradigms. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 45, 452-479.
42. Schwarz, W., & Ischebeck, A. (2003). On the relative-speed account of number-size interference effects in comparative judgments of numerals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 507-522.
43. Schwarz, W., & Keus, I. M. (2004). Moving along the mental number line: Comparing SNARC effects with saccadic and manual response. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 651-664.
44. Schwarz, W. & Müller, D. (2006). Spatial associations in number-related tasks: A comparison of manual and pedal responses. Experimental Psychology, 53, 4-15.
45. Schweickert, R. (1978). A critical path generalization of the additive factor method: Analysis of a Stroop task. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 18, 105-139.
46. Sigman, M., & Dehaene, S. (2005). Parsing a cognitive task: A characterization of the Mind's bottleneck. PLoS Biology, 3, e37.
47. Smith, M. C. (1969). The effect of varying information on the psychological refractory period. Acta Psychologica, 30, 220-231.
48. Sternberg, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method. In: W. G. Kloster (Ed.), Attention and performance II (pp. 276-315). Amsterdam: North Holland.
49. Telford, C. W. (1931). The refractory phase of voluntary and associative responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 14, 1-36.
50. Tlauka, M. (2002). The processing of numbers in choice-reaction tasks. Australian Journal of Psychology, 54, 94-98.
51. Tombu, M., & Jolicœr, P. (2003). A central capacity sharing model of dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 3-18.
52. Tombu, M., & Jolicœr, P. (2005). Testing the predictions of the central capacity sharing model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 790-820.
53. Zorzi, M., Priftis, K., & Umiltà, C. (2002). Neglect disrupts the mental number line. Nature, 417, 138-139.