Whether and how the brain encodes discrete numerical magnitude differently from continuous nonnumerical magnitude is hotly debated. In a previous set of studies, we orthogonally varied numerical (numerosity) and nonnumerical (size and spacing) dimensions of dot arrays and demonstrated a strong modulation of early visual evoked potentials (VEPs) by numerosity and not by nonnumerical dimensions. Although very little is known about the brain's response to systematic changes in continuous dimensions of a dot array, some authors intuit that the visual processing stream must be more sensitive to continuous magnitude information than to numerosity. To address this possibility, we measured VEPs of participants viewing dot arrays that changed exclusively in one nonnumerical magnitude dimension at a time (size or spacing) while holding numerosity constant and compared this to a condition where numerosity was changed while holding size and spacing constant. We found reliable but small neural sensitivity to exclusive changes in size and spacing; however, exclusively changing numerosity elicited a much more robust modulation of the VEPs. Together with previous work, these findings suggest that sensitivity to magnitude dimensions in early visual cortex is context dependent: The brain is moderately sensitive to changes in size and spacing when numerosity is held constant, but sensitivity to these continuous variables diminishes to a negligible level when numerosity is allowed to vary at the same time. Neurophysiological explanations for the encoding and context dependency of numerical and nonnumerical magnitudes are proposed within the framework of neuronal normalization.

Numerosity perception is largely governed by two mechanisms. The first so-called subitizing system allows one to enumerate a small number of items (up to three or four) without error. The second system allows only an approximate estimation of larger numerosities. Here, we investigate the neural bases of the two systems using sequentially presented numerosity. Sequential numerosity (i.e., the number of events presented over time) starts as a subitizable set but may eventually transition into a larger numerosity in the approximate estimation range, thus offering a unique opportunity to investigate the neural signature of that transition point, or subitizing boundary. If sequential numerosity is encoded by two distinct perceptual mechanisms (i.e., for subitizing and approximate estimation), neural representations of the sequentially presented items crossing the subitizing boundary should be sharply distinguishable. In contrast, if sequential numerosity is encoded by a single perceptual mechanism for all numerosities and subitizing is achieved through an external postperceptual mechanism, no such differences in the neural representations should indicate the subitizing boundary. Using the high temporal resolution of the EEG technique incorporating a multivariate decoding analysis, we found results consistent with the latter hypothesis: No sharp representational distinctions were observed between items across the subitizing boundary, which is in contrast with the behavioral pattern of subitizing. The results support a single perceptual mechanism encoding sequential numerosities, whereas subitizing may be supported by a postperceptual attentional mechanism operating at a later processing stage.

Serial dependence—an attractive perceptual bias whereby a current stimulus is perceived to be similar to previously seen ones—is thought to represent the process that facilitates the stability and continuity of visual perception. Recent results demonstrate a neural signature of serial dependence in numerosity perception, emerging very early in the time course during perceptual processing. However, whether such a perceptual signature is retained after the initial processing remains unknown. Here, we address this question by investigating the neural dynamics of serial dependence using a recently developed technique that allowed a reactivation of hidden memory states. Participants performed a numerosity discrimination task during EEG recording, with task-relevant dot array stimuli preceded by a task-irrelevant stimulus inducing serial dependence. Importantly, the neural network storing the representation of the numerosity stimulus was perturbed (or pinged) so that the hidden states of that representation can be explicitly quantified. The results first show that a neural signature of serial dependence emerges early in the brain signals, starting soon after stimulus onset. Critical to the central question, the pings at a later latency could successfully reactivate the biased representation of the initial stimulus carrying the signature of serial dependence. These results provide one of the first pieces of empirical evidence that the biased neural representation of a stimulus initially induced by serial dependence is preserved throughout a relatively long period.

Recent studies have demonstrated that the numerosity of visually presented dot arrays is represented in low-level visual cortex extremely early in latency. However, whether or not such an early neural signature reflects the perceptual representation of numerosity remains unknown. Alternatively, such a signature may indicate the raw sensory representation of the dot-array stimulus before becoming the perceived representation of numerosity. Here, we addressed this question by using the connectedness illusion, whereby arrays with pairwise connected dots are perceived to be less numerous compared with arrays containing isolated dots. Using EEG and fMRI in two independent experiments, we measured neural responses to dot-array stimuli comprising 16 or 32 dots, either isolated or pairwise connected. The effect of connectedness, which reflects the segmentation of the visual stimulus into perceptual units, was observed in the neural activity after 150 msec post stimulus onset in the EEG experiment and in area V3 in the fMRI experiment using a multivariate pattern analysis. In contrast, earlier neural activity before 100 msec and in area V2 was strictly modulated by numerosity regardless of connectedness, suggesting that this early activity reflects the sensory representation of a dot array before perceptual segmentation. Our findings thus demonstrate that the neural representation for numerosity in early visual cortex is not sufficient for visual number perception and suggest that the perceptual encoding of numerosity occurs at or after the segmentation process that takes place later in area V3.

Recent fMRI research has demonstrated that letters and numbers are preferentially processed in distinct regions and hemispheres in the visual cortex. In particular, the left visual cortex preferentially processes letters compared with numbers, whereas the right visual cortex preferentially processes numbers compared with letters. Because letters and numbers are cultural inventions and are otherwise physically arbitrary, such a double dissociation is strong evidence for experiential effects on neural architecture. Here, we use the high temporal resolution of ERPs to investigate the temporal dynamics of the neural dissociation between letters and numbers. We show that the divergence between ERP traces to letters and numbers emerges very early in processing. Letters evoked greater N1 waves (latencies 140–170 msec) than did numbers over left occipital channels, whereas numbers evoked greater N1s than letters over the right, suggesting letters and numbers are preferentially processed in opposite hemispheres early in visual encoding. Moreover, strings of letters, but not single letters, elicited greater P2 ERP waves (starting around 250 msec) than numbers did over the left hemisphere, suggesting that the visual cortex is tuned to selectively process combinations of letters, but not numbers, further along in the visual processing stream. Additionally, the processing of both of these culturally defined stimulus types differentiated from similar but unfamiliar visual stimulus forms (false fonts) even earlier in the processing stream (the P1 at 100 msec). These findings imply major cortical specialization processes within the visual system driven by experience with reading and mathematics.

The visual recognition of letters dissociates from the recognition of numbers at both the behavioral and neural level. In this article, using fMRI, we investigate whether the visual recognition of numbers dissociates from letters, thereby establishing a double dissociation. In Experiment 1, participants viewed strings of consonants and Arabic numerals. We found that letters activated the left midfusiform and inferior temporal gyri more than numbers, replicating previous studies, whereas numbers activated a right lateral occipital area more than letters at the group level. Because the distinction between letters and numbers is culturally defined and relatively arbitrary, this double dissociation provides some of the strongest evidence to date that a neural dissociation can emerge as a result of experience. We then investigated a potential source of the observed neural dissociation. Specifically, we tested the hypothesis that lateralization of visual number recognition depends on lateralization of higher-order numerical processing. In Experiment 2, the same participants performed addition, subtraction, and counting on arrays of nonsymbolic stimuli varying in numerosity, which produced neural activity in and around the intraparietal sulcus, a region associated with higher-order numerical processing. We found that individual differences in the lateralization of number activity in visual cortex could be explained by individual differences in the lateralization of numerical processing in parietal cortex, suggesting a functional relationship between the two regions. Together, these results demonstrate a neural double dissociation between letter and number recognition and suggest that higher-level numerical processing in parietal cortex may influence the neural organization of number processing in visual cortex.