Look, no hands: A perceptual task shows that number magnitude induces shifts of attention

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 413-418

  Nicholls, Michael E R ^a   Loftus, Andrea M ^a   Gevers, Wim ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^b GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MATHEMATICS; REACTION TIME; VISION;

ADULT; ATTENTION; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MATHEMATICS; REACTION TIME; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 48049091861     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/PBR.15.2.413     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. BAUER, D. W., & MILLER, J. (1982). Stimulus-response compatibility and the motor system. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 34A, 367-380.
2. BOWERS, D., & HEILMAN, K. M. (1980). Pseudoneglect: Effects of hemispace on a tactile line bisection task. Neuropsychologia, 18, 491-498.
3. CALABRIA, M., & ROSSETTI, Y. (2005). Interference between number processing and line bisection: A methodology. Neuropsychologia, 43, 779-783.
4. CASAROTTI, M., MICHIELIN, M., ZORZI, M., & UMILTÀ, C. (2007). Temporal order judgements reveal how number magnitude affects visu-ospatial attention. Cognition, 102, 101-117.
5. DEHAENE, S., BOSSINI, S., & GIRAUX, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 371-396.
6. FISCHER, M. H. (2001). Number processing induces spatial performance biases. Neurology, 57, 822-826.
7. FISCHER, M. H., CASTEL, A. D., DODD, M. D., & PRATT, J. (2003). Perceiving numbers causes shifts of attention. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 555-556.
8. GALFANO, G., RUSCONI, E., & UMILTÀ, C. (2006). Number magnitude orients attention, but not against one's will. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 869-874.
9. GEVERS, W., LAMMERTYN, J., NOTEBAERT, W., VEROUTS, T., & FIAS, W. (2006). Automatic response activation of implicit spatial information: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Acta Psychologica, 122, 221-233.
10. GEVERS, W., REYNVOET, B., & FIAS, W. (2003). The mental representation of sequences is spatially organized. Cognition, 87, 87-95.
11. HOMMEL, B., MÜSSELER, J., ASCHERSLEBEN, G., & PRINZ, W. (2001). A theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 24, 849-937.
12. ITO, Y., & HATTA, T. (2004). Spatial structure of quantitative representation of numbers: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Memory & Cognition, 32, 662-673.
13. JEWELL, G., & MCCOURT, M. E. (2000). Pseudoneglect: A review and meta-analysis of performance factors in line bisection tasks. Neuropsychologia, 38, 93-110.
14. KENNETT, S., MARTIN, E., SPENCE, C., & DRIVER, J. (2001). Tactile-visual links in exogenous spatial attention under different postures: Convergent evidence from psychophysics and ERPs. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13, 462-478.
15. KEUS, I. M., JENKS, K. M., & SCHWARZ, W. (2005). Psychophysical evidence that the SNARC effect has its functional locus in the response selection stage. Cognitive Brain Research, 24, 48-56.
16. 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.
17. MAPELLI, D., RUSCONI, E., & UMILTÀ, C. (2003). The SNARC effect: An instance of the Simon effect? Cognition, 88, B1-B10.
18. MATTINGLEY, J. B., BERBEROVIC, N., CORBEN, L., SLAVIN, M. J., NICHOLLS, M. E. R., & BRADSHAW, J. L. (2004). The grayscales task: A perceptual measure of attentional bias following unilateral hemispheric damage. Neuropsychologia, 42, 387-394.
19. MCCOURT, M. E. (2001). Performance consistency of normal observers in forced-choice tachistoscopic visual line bisection. Neuropsychologia, 39, 1065-1076.
20. MCCOURT, M. E., & JEWELL, G. (1999). Visuospatial attention in line bisection: Stimulus modulation of pseudoneglect. Neuropsychologia, 37, 843-855.
21. NICHOLLS, M. E. R., BRADSHAW, J. L., & MATTINGLEY, J. B. (1999). Free-viewing perceptual asymmetries for the judgement of shade, nu-merosity and size. Neuropsychologia, 37, 307-314.
22. OLDFIELD, R. C. (1971). The assessment of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97-133.
23. PROCTOR, R. W., & CHO, Y. S. (2006). Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 416-442.
24. RISTIC, J., WRIGHT, A., & KINGSTONE, A. (2006). The number line effect reflects top-down control. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 862-868.
25. SCHWARZ, W., & KEUS, I. M. (2004). Moving the eyes along the mental number line: Comparing SNARC effects with saccadic and manual responses. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 651-664.
26. STOIANOV, I., KRAMER, P., UMILTA, C., & ZORZI, M. (2008). Visuospatial priming of the mental number line. Cognition, 106, 770-779.