Continuous visual properties of number influence the formation of novel symbolic representations

REFERENCES

• Cantrell, L., & Smith, L. B. (2013). Open questions and a proposal: A critical review of the evidence on infant numerical abilities. Cognition, 128(3), 331–352. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2013.04.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cordes, S., & Brannon, E. M. (2009). The relative salience of discrete and continuous quantity in young infants. Developmental Science, 12(3), 453–463. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00781.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dehaene, S. (1997). The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gebuis, T., & Reynvoet, B. (2012a). The role of visual information in numerosity estimation. PloS One, 7(5), e37426. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0037426
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gebuis, T., & Reynvoet, B. (2012b). The interplay between nonsymbolic number and its continuous visual properties. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(4), 642–648. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0037426
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilmore, C., Attridge, N., Clayton, S., Cragg, L., Johnson, S., Marlow, N., … Inglis, M. (2013). Individual differences in inhibitory control, not non-verbal number acuity, correlate with mathematics achievement. PloS One, 8(6), e67374. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0067374
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halberda, J., Mazzocco, M. M. M., & Feigenson, L. (2008). Individual differences in non-verbal number acuity correlate with maths achievement. Nature, 455(7213), 665–668. doi:10.1038/nature07246
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurewitz, F., Gelman, R., & Schnitzer, B. (2006). Sometimes area counts more than number. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(51), 19599–19604. doi:10.1073/pnas.0609485103
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan, K. E., & Baker, J. (2010). Multisensory information boosts numerical matching abilities in young children. Developmental Science, 14(2), 205–213. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.00966.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Le Corre, M., & Carey, S. (2007). One, two, three, four, nothing more: An investigation of the conceptual sources of the verbal counting principles. Cognition, 105(2), 395–438. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2006.10.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leibovich, T., & Henik, A. (2013). Magnitude processing in non-symbolic stimuli. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, article no. 375. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00375
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G., Rakison, D. H., & McClelland, J. L. (2007). Language is not just for talking redundant labels facilitate learning of novel categories. Psychological Science, 18(12), 1077–1083.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyons, I. M., & Ansari, D. (2009). The cerebral basis of mapping nonsymbolic numerical quantities onto abstract symbols: An fMRI training study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21(9), 1720–1735. doi:10.1162/jocn.2009.21124
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyons, I. M., Ansari, D., & Beilock, S. L. (2012). Symbolic estrangement: Evidence against a strong association between numerical symbols and the quantities they represent. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 141, 635–641. doi:10.1037/a0027248
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyons, I. M., & Beilock, S. L. (2013). Ordinality and the nature of symbolic numbers. The Journal of Neuroscience , 33(43), 17052–17061. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1775-13.2013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mix, K. S., Huttenlocher, J., & Levine, S. C. (2002). Multiple cues for quantification in infancy: Is number one of them? Psychological Bulletin, 128(2), 278–294. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.128.2.278
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moyer, R. S., & Landauer, T. K. (1967). Time required for judgements of numerical inequality. Nature, 215, 1519–1520. 58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nys, J., & Content, A. (2012). Judgement of discrete and continuous quantity in adults: Number counts ! The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(4), 675–690. doi:10.1080/17470218.2011.619661
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Omniglot. (2013). Tékumel writing systems. Retrieved from http://www.omniglot.com/writing/tekumel.php
   Google Scholar
• Piazza, M. (2010). Neurocognitive start-up tools for symbolic number representations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(12), 542–551. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2010.09.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price, G. R., Palmer, D., Battista, C., & Ansari, D. (2012). Nonsymbolic numerical magnitude comparison: Reliability and validity of different task variants and outcome measures, and their relationship to arithmetic achievement in adults. Acta Psychologica, 140(1), 50–57. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.02.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prinzmetal, W., McCool, C., & Park, S. (2005). Attention: Reaction time and accuracy reveal different mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 73–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rousselle, L., Palmers, E., & Noël, M.-P. (2004). Magnitude comparison in preschoolers: What counts? Influence of perceptual variables. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 87(1), 57–84. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2003.10.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sasanguie, D., Defever, E., Maertens, B., & Reynvoet, B. (2013). The approximate number system is not predictive for symbolic number processing in kindergartners. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 271–280. doi:10.1080/17470218.2013.803581
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seidenberg, M. S., Plaut, D. C., Petersen, A. S., McClelland, J. L., & McRae, K. (1994). Nonword pronunciation and models of word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(6), 1177–1196.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan, J., & Barner, D. (2013). How are number words mapped to approximate magnitudes? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(2), 389–402. doi:10.1080/17470218.2012.715655
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szűcs, D., Nobes, A., Devine, A., Gabriel, F. C., & Gebuis, T. (2013). Visual stimulus parameters seriously compromise the measurement of approximate number system acuity and comparative effects between adults and children. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, article no. 444. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00444
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynn, K. (1992). Children's acquisition of the number words and the counting system. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 220–251.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao, H., Chen, C., Zhang, H., Zhou, X., Mei, L., Chen, C., …, Dong, Q. (2012). Is order the defining feature of magnitude representation? An ERP study on learning numerical magnitude and spatial order of artificial symbols. PloS One, 7(11), e49565. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049565
   Google Scholar