Enumeration of small collections violates Weber's law

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 93-99

  Choo, H ^a   Franconeri, S L ^b  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Number Perception; Numerosity; Subitizing

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MATHEMATICAL PHENOMENA; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; VISION; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; MATHEMATICAL CONCEPTS; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; SIGNAL DETECTION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84893139838     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-013-0474-4     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Allen, R., & McGeorge, P. (2008). Enumeration: Shape information and expertise. Acta Psychologica, 129, 26-31. doi: 10. 1016/j. actpsy. 2008. 04. 003.
2. Balakrishnan, J. D., & Ashby, F. G. (1991). Is subitizing a unique numerical ability? Perception & Psychophysics, 50, 555-564.
3. Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433-436. doi: 10. 1163/156856897X00357.
4. Buckley, P. B., & Gillman, C. B. (1974). Comparisons of digits and dot patterns. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 103, 1131-1136.
5. Carey, S. (2010). The origin of concepts. New York: Oxford University Press.
6. Chesney, D. L., & Haladjian, H. H. (2011). Evidence for a shared mechanism used in multiple-object tracking and subitizing. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73, 2457-2480. doi: 10. 3758/s13414-011-0204-9.
7. Crossman, E. R. F. W. (1955). The measurement of discriminability. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 7, 176-195. doi: 10. 1080/17470215508416692.
8. Dehaene, S. (2003). The neural basis of the Weber-Fechner law: A logarithmic mental number line. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 145-147. doi: 10. 1016/S1364-6613(03)00055-X.
9. Dehaene, S., & Mehler, J. (1992). Cross-linguistic regularities in the frequency of number words. Cognition, 43, 1-29.
10. Delvenne, J.-F., Castronovo, J., Demeyere, N., & Humphreys, G. W. (2011). Bilateral field advantage in visual enumeration. PLoS ONE, 6, e17743. doi: 10. 1371/journal. pone. 0017743.
11. Feigenson, L. (2007). The representations underlying infants' choice of more: Object file versus analog magnitude. Psychological Science, 13, 150-156.
12. Franconeri, S. L., Alvarez, G. A., & Cavanagh, P. C. (2013). Flexible cognitive resources: Competitive content maps for attention and memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17, 134-141. doi: 10. 1016/j. tics. 2013. 01. 010.
13. Franconeri, S. L., Alvarez, G. A., & Enns, J. T. (2007). How many locations can be selected at once? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1003-1012. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 33. 5. 1003.
14. Franconeri, S. L., Bemis, D. K., & Alvarez, G. A. (2009). Number estimation relies on a set of segmented objects. Cognition, 113, 1-13. doi: 10. 1016/j. cognition. 2009. 07. 002.
15. Franconeri, S. L., Jonathan, S., & Scimeca, J. M. (2010). Tracking multiple objects is limited only by spatial interference, not speed, time, or capacity. Psychological Science, 21, 920-925.
16. Gallistel, C. R., & Gelman, R. (1991). Subitizing: The preverbal counting process. In F. I. M. Craik, W. Kessen, & A. Ortony (Eds.), Essays in honor of George Mandler (pp. 65-81). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
17. Henmon, V. A. C. (1906). The time of perception as a measure of differences in sensation. Archives of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Methods, 8.
18. Hespos, S. J., Ferry, A. L., & Rips, L. J. (2009). Five-month-old infants have different expectations for solids and substances. Psychological Science, 20, 603-611. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-9280. 2009. 02331. x.
19. Hutchinson, S., Johnson, S., & Louwerse, M. M. (2011). A linguistic remark on SNARC: Language and perceptual processes in spatial-numerical association. In L. Carlson, C. Hölscher, & T. F. Shipley (Eds.), Expanding the space of cognitive science: Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 1313-1318). Austin: Cognitive Science Society.
20. Intriligator, J., & Cavanagh, P. (2001). The spatial resolution of visual attention. Cognitive Psychology, 43, 171-216. doi: 10. 1006/cogp. 2001. 0755.
21. Jevons, W. S. (1871). The power of numerical discrimination. Nature, 3, 281-282.
22. Kaufman, E. L., Lord, M. W., Reese, T. W., & Volkmann, J. (1949). The discrimination of visual number. American Journal of Psychology, 62, 498-525.
23. Lemmon, V. W. (1927). The relation of reaction time to measures of intelligence, memory, and learning. Archives of Psychology, 15.
24. Logan, G. D., & Zbrodoff, N. J. (2003). Subitizing and similarity: Toward a pattern-matching theory of enumeration. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 676-682. doi: 10. 3758/BF03196531.
25. Louwerse, M. M., & Benesh, N. (2012). Representing spatial structure through maps and language: Lord of the rings encodes the spatial structure of middle earth. Cognitive Science, 36, 1-14. doi: 10. 1111/cogs. 12000.
26. Luck, S. J., & Vogel, E. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390, 279-281. doi: 10. 1038/36846.
27. Mandler, G., & Shebo, B. J. (1982). Subitizing: An analysis of its component processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111, 1-22. doi: 10. 1037/0096-3445. 111. 1. 1.
28. Olivers, C. N. L., & Watson, D. G. (2008). Subitizing requires attention. Visual Cognition, 16, 439-462.
29. Pelli, D. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437-442. doi: 10. 1163/156856897X00366.
30. Peterson, S. A., & Simon, T. J. (2000). Computational evidence for the subitizing phenomenon as an emergent property of the human cognitive architecture. Cognitive Science, 24, 93-122.
31. Piazza, M., Fumarolar, A., Chinello, A., & Melcher, D. (2011). Subitizing reflects visuo-spatial object inviduation capacity. Cognition, 121, 147-153.
32. Pylyshyn, Z. W., & Storm, R. W. (1988). Tracking multiple independent targets: Evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. Spatial Vision, 3, 179-197. doi: 10. 1163/156856888X00122.
33. Railo, H., Koivisto, M., Revonsuo, A., & Hannulae, M. (2008). The role of attention in subitizing. Cognition, 107, 82-104.
34. Revkin, S. K., Piazza, M., Izard, V., Cohen, L., & Dehaene, S. (2008). Does subitizing reflect numerical estimation? Psychological Science, 19, 607-614. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-9280. 2008. 02130. x.
35. Trick, L. M., & Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1994). Why are small and large numbers enumerated differently? A limited-capacity preattentive stage in vision. Psychological Review, 101, 80-102. doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 101. 1. 80.
36. Whalen, J., Gallistel, C. R., & Gelman, R. (1999). Nonverbal counting in humans: The psychophysics of number representation. Psychological Science, 10, 130-137. doi: 10. 1111/1467-9280. 00120.