Cultural characteristics dissociate magnitude and ordinal information processing

Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 639-650

  Shaki, Samuel ^a   Gevers, Wim ^b  

^a ARIEL UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^b UNIVERSITÉ LIBRE DE BRUXELLES   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Numerical cognition; Ordinal processing; Reading direction; SNARC effect

Indexed keywords

EID: 79956147554     PISSN: 00220221     EISSN: 15525422     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0022022111406100     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Besner, D., & Coltheart, M. (1979). Ideographic and alphabetic processing in skilled reading of English. Neuropsychologia, 17, 467-472.
2. Chan, T., & Bergen, B. (2005). Writing direction influences spatial cognition. In unpublished Proceedings of the Twenty-seventh Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.
3. Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 371-396.
4. Dobel, C., Diesendruck, G., & Bolte, J. (2007). How writing system and age influence spatial representations of actions: A developmental, cross-linguistic study. Psychological Science, 18, 487-491.
5. 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(1), 95-110.
6. Fias, W., Lammertyn, J., Caessens, B., & Orban, G.A. (2007). Processing of abstract ordinal knowledge in the horizontal segment of the intraparietal sulcus. Journal of Neuroscience, 27(33), 8952-8956.
7. Fischer, M.H., & Mills, R.A., & Shaki, S. (2010). How to cook a SNARC: Number placement in text rapidly changes spatial-numerical associations. Brain and Cognition, 72, 333-336.
8. Fischer, M.H., Shaki, S., & Cruise, A. (2009). It takes only one word to quash the SNARC. Experimental Psychology, 56(5), 361-366.
9. Fitts, P.M., & Seeger, C.M. (1953). S-R compatibility: Spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46, 199-210.
10. Gevers, W., Reynvoet, B., & Fias, W. (2003). The mental representation of ordinal sequences is spatially organized. Cognition, 87, B87-B95.
11. Gevers, W., Reynvoet, B., & Fias, W. (2004). The mental representation of ordinal sequences is spatially organized: Evidence from days of the week. Cortex, 40, 171-172.
12. Gevers, W., Santens, S., Dhooge, E., Chen, Q., Van den Bossche, L., Fias, W., & Verguts, T. (in press). Verbal-spatial and visuospatial coding of number-space interactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.
13. Gevers, W., Verguts, T., Reynvoet, B., Caessens, B., & Fias, W. (2006). Numbers and space: A computational model of the SNARC effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(1), 32-44.
14. Göbel, S.M., Shaki, S., & Fischer, M.H. (this issue). The cultural number line: A review of cultural and linguistic influences on the development of number processing. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology.
15. Henik, A., & Tzelgov, J. (1982). Is three greater than five: The relation between physical and semantic size in comparison tasks. Memory & Cognition, 10, 389-395.
16. Ito, Y., & Hatta, T. (2004). Spatial structure of quantitative representation of numbers: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Memory & Cognition, 32, 662-673.
17. Kazandjian, S., Dupierrix, E., Gaash, E., Love, I.Y., Zivotofsky, A.Z., De Agostini, M., & Chokron, S. (2009). Egocentric reference in bidirectional readers as measured by the straightahead pointing task. Brain Research, 9, 133-141.
18. Lorch, R.F., & Myers, J.L. (1990). Regression analyses of repeated measures data in cognitive research. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 149-157.
19. Notebaert, W., Gevers, W., Verguts, T., & Fias, W. (2006). Shared spatial representations for numbers and space: The reversal of the SNARC and the Simon effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance, 32, 1197-1207.
20. Proctor, R.W., & Cho, Y.S. (2006). Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 416-442.
21. Razpurker-Apfeld, I., & Koriat, A. (2006). Flexible mental processes in numerical size judgments: The case of Hebrew letters that are used to convey numbers. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 78-83.
22. Shaki, S., & Fischer, M.H. (2008). Reading space into numbers-A cross-linguistic comparison of the SNARC effect. Cognition, 108, 590-599.
23. Shaki, S., Fischer, M.H., & Petrusic, W.M. (2009). Reading habits for both words and numbers contribute to the SNARC effect. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16(2), 328-331.
24. Turconi, E., Jemel, B., Rossion, B., & Seron, X. (2004). Electrophysiological evidence for differential processing of numerical quantity and order in humans. Cognitive Brain Research, 21, 22-38.
25. Turconi, E., & Seron, X. (2002). Dissociation between order and quantity meaning in a patient with Gerstmann syndrome. Cortex, 38, 911-914.
26. Van Dijck, J.P., Gevers, W., & Fias, W. (2009). Numbers are associated with different types of spatial information depending on the task. Cognition, 113(2), 248-253.
27. Wood, G., Nuerk, H.C., Willmes, K., & Fischer, M.H. (2008). On the cognitive link between space and number: A meta-analysis of the SNARC effect. Psychology Science Quarterly, 50(4), 489-525.
28. Zebian, S. (2005). Linkages between number concepts, spatial thinking, and directionality of writing: The SNARC effect and the reverse SNARC effect in English and Arabic monoliterates, biliterates, and illiterate Arabic speakers. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 5, 166-190.