Is more always up? Evidence for a preference of hand-based associations over vertical number mappings

References

• Aarts, A. A., Anderson, J. E., Anderson, C. J., Attridge, P. R., Attwood, A., Axt, J., & , … Zuni, K. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716-1–aac4716-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subject and item. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., & Baayen, R. H. (2015). Parsimonious mixed models. Retrieved from arXiv:1506.04967 (stat.ME).
   Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bächtold, D., Baumüller, M., & Brugger, P. (1998). Stimulus-response compatibility in representational space. Neuropsychologia, 36, 731–735.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H. (1973). Space, time, semantics, and the child. In T. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language (pp. 27–63). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Colby, C. L., & Goldberg, M. E. (1999). Space and attention in parietal cortex. Annual Reviews of Neuroscience, 22, 319–349.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 371–396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Dijck, J. P., & Fias, W. (2011). A working memory account of spatial-numerical associations. Cognition, 119, 114–115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, M., & Brugger, P. (2011). When digits help digits: Spatial–numerical associations point to finger counting as prime example of embodied cognition. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 260.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, M. H., & Hill, R. (2004). A SNARC in the dark: Input modality affects number representation. 22nd European Workshop of Cognitive Neuropsychology, Bressanone, 26–31.
   Google Scholar
• Gevers, W., Lammertyn, J., Notebaert, W., Verguts, T., & Fias, W. (2006). Automatic response activation of implicit spatial information: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Acta Psychologica, 122, 221–233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartmann, M., Gashaj, V., Stahnke, A., & Mast, F. W. (2014). There is more than “More is up”: Hand and foot responses reverse the vertical association of number magnitudes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(4), 1401–1414.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartmann, M., Grabherr, L., & Mast, F. W. (2012). Moving along the mental number line: Interactions between whole-body motion and numerical cognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 1416–1427.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes, K. J., & Lourenco, S. F. (2012). Orienting numbers in mental space: Horizontal organization trumps vertical. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 1044–1051.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubbard, E. M., Piazza, M., Pinel, P., & Dehaene, S. (2005). Interactions between number and space in parietal cortex. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6, 435–448.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hung, Y., Hung, D. L., Tzeng, O. J. L., & Wu, D. H. (2008). Flexible spatial mapping of different notations of numbers in Chinese readers. Cognition, 106, 1441–1450.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ito, Y., & Hatta, T. (2004). Spatial structure of quantitative representation of numbers: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Memory & Cognition, 32, 662–673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klatzky, R. L. (1998). Allocentric and egocentric spatial representations:Definitions, distinctions, and interconnections. In C. Freksa, C. Habel, & K. F. Wender (Eds.), Spatial cognition—An interdisciplinary approach to representation and processing of spatial knowledge (lecture notes in artificial intelligence 1404) (pp. 1–17). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Knops, A., Viarouge, A., & Dehaene, S. (2009). Dynamic representations underlying symbolic and nonsymbolic calculation: Evidence from the operational momentum effect. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 71(4), 803–821.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krause, F., & Lindemann, O. (2014). Experiment: A Python library for cognitive and neuroscientific experiments. Behavior Research Methods, 46(2), 416–428.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2016). lmerTest: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Retrieved from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lmerTest.
   Google Scholar
• Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Levinson, S. C., Kita, S., Haun, D., & Rasch, B. (2002). Returning the tables: Language affects spatial reasoning. Cognition, 84, 155–188.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindemann, O., Abolafia, J. M., Pratt, J., & Bekkering, H. (2008). Coding strategies in number space: Memory requirements influence spatial- numerical associations. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 515–524.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindemann, O., & Fischer, M. (2015). Editorial: Embodied number processing. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27, 381–387.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loetscher, T., Bockisch, C. J., Nicholls, M. E., & Brugger, P. (2010). Eye position predicts what number you have in mind. Current Biology, 20, 264–265.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lugli, L., Baroni, G., Anelli, F., Borghi, A. M., Nicoletti, R., & Watanabe, K. (2013). Counting is easier while experiencing a congruent motion. PLoS One, 8, e64500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller, D., & Schwarz, W. (2007). Is there an internal association of numbers to hands? The task set influences the nature of the SNARC effect. Memory & Cognition, 35(5), 1151–1161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Proctor, R. W., & Cho, Y. S. (2006). Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance in speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 416–462.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarz, W., & Keus, I. (2004). Moving the eyes along the mental number line: Comparing SNARC effects with manual and saccadic responses. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 651–664.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaki, S., & Fischer, M. (2012). Multiple spatial mappings in numerical cognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(3), 804–809.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viarouge, A., Hubbard, E. M., & Dehaene, S. (2014). The organization of spatial reference frames involved in the SNARC effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(8), 1484–1499.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiemers, M., Bekkering, H., & Lindemann, O. (2014). Spatial interference in mental arithmetic: Evidence from the motion-arithmetic compatibility effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(8), 1557–1570.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winter, B., & Matlock, T. (2013). More is up … and right: Random number generation along two axes. In M. Knauff, M. Pauen, N. Sebanz, & I. Wachsmuth (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 3789–3974). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
   Google Scholar
• Winter, B., Matlock, T., Shaki, S., & Fischer, M. (2015). Mental number space in three dimensions. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 57, 209–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood, G., Nuerk, H. C., & Willmes, K. (2006). Crossed hands and the SNARC effect: A failure to replicate Dehaene, Bossini and Giraux (1993). Cortex, 42, 1069–1079.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zaehle, T., Jordan, K., Wüstenberg, T., Baudewig, J., Dechent, P., & Mast, F. W. (2006). The neural basis of the egocentric and allocentric spatial frame of reference. Brain Research, 1137, 92–103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zorzi, M., Bonato, M., Treccani, B., Scalambrin, G., Marenzi, R., & Priftis, K. (2012). Neglect impairs explicit processing of the mental number line. Frontier in Human Neuroscience, 6, 125. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00125
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar