Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
NARROW
Format
Journal
TocHeadingTitle
Date
Availability
1-2 of 2
Daniel C. Hyde
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (2011) 23 (9): 2336–2351.
Published: 01 September 2011
FIGURES
| View All (7)
Abstract
View articletitled, Spatial Attention Determines the Nature of Nonverbal Number Representation
View
PDF
for article titled, Spatial Attention Determines the Nature of Nonverbal Number Representation
Coordinated studies of adults, infants, and nonhuman animals provide evidence for two systems of nonverbal number representation: a “parallel individuation” system that represents individual items and a “numerical magnitude” system that represents the approximate cardinal value of a group. However, there is considerable debate about the nature and functions of these systems, due largely to the fact that some studies show a dissociation between small (1–3) and large (>3) number representation, whereas others do not. Using event-related potentials, we show that it is possible to determine which system will represent the numerical value of a small number set (1–3 items) by manipulating spatial attention. Specifically, when attention can select individual objects, an early brain response (N1) scales with the cardinal value of the display, the signature of parallel individuation. In contrast, when attention cannot select individual objects or is occupied by another task, a later brain response (P2p) scales with ratio, the signature of the approximate numerical magnitude system. These results provide neural evidence that small numbers can be represented as approximate numerical magnitudes. Further, they empirically demonstrate the importance of early attentional processes to number representation by showing that the way in which attention disperses across a scene determines which numerical system will deploy in a given context.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (2009) 21 (6): 1039–1053.
Published: 01 June 2009
Abstract
View articletitled, All Numbers Are Not Equal: An Electrophysiological Investigation of Small and Large Number Representations
View
PDF
for article titled, All Numbers Are Not Equal: An Electrophysiological Investigation of Small and Large Number Representations
Behavioral and brain imaging research indicates that human infants, humans adults, and many nonhuman animals represent large nonsymbolic numbers approximately, discriminating between sets with a ratio limit on accuracy. Some behavioral evidence, especially with human infants, suggests that these representations differ from representations of small numbers of objects. To investigate neural signatures of this distinction, event-related potentials were recorded as adult humans passively viewed the sequential presentation of dot arrays in an adaptation paradigm. In two studies, subjects viewed successive arrays of a single number of dots interspersed with test arrays presenting the same or a different number; numerical range (small numerical quantities 1–3 vs. large numerical quantities 8–24) and ratio difference varied across blocks as continuous variables were controlled. An early-evoked component (N1), observed over widespread posterior scalp locations, was modulated by absolute number with small, but not large, number arrays. In contrast, a later component (P2p), observed over the same scalp locations, was modulated by the ratio difference between arrays for large, but not small, numbers. Despite many years of experience with symbolic systems that apply equally to all numbers, adults spontaneously process small and large numbers differently. They appear to treat small-number arrays as individual objects to be tracked through space and time, and large-number arrays as cardinal values to be compared and manipulated.