Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T14:48:08.163Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Numerical representations: Abstract or supramodal? Some may be spatial

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2009

Giuseppe Vallar  and
Luisa Girelli
Giuseppe Vallar
Affiliation:
Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Dipartimento di Psicologia, Edificio U6, 20126 Milan, Italy. giuseppe.vallar@unimib.ithttp://www.psicologia.unimib.it/03_persone/scheda_personale.php?personId=92 Neuropsychological Laboratory, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, 20122 Milan, Italy. giuseppe.vallar@unimib.ithttp://www.psicologia.unimib.it/03_persone/scheda_personale.php?personId=92
Luisa Girelli
Affiliation:
Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Dipartimento di Psicologia, Edificio U9, 20126 Milan, Italy. luisa.girelli@unimib.ithttp://www.psicologia.unimib.it/03_persone/scheda_personale.php?personId=62
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The target article undermines the existence of a shared unitary numerical format, illustrating a variety of representations. The “abstract”/“not-abstract” dichotomy does not capture their specific features. These representations are “supramodal” with respect to the sensory modality of the stimulus, and independent of its specific notation, with a main role of spatial codes, both related and unrelated to the mental number line.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 32 , Issue 3-4 , August 2009 , pp. 354 - 355
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bächtold, D., Baumuller, M. & Brugger, P. (1998) Stimulus-response compatibility in representational space. Neuropsychologia 36:731–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dehaene, S., Dehaene-Lambertz, G. & Cohen, L. (1998a) Abstract representations of numbers in the animal and human brain. Trends in Neurosciences 21:355–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de Hevia, M. D., Girelli, L., Bricolo, E. & Vallar, G. (2008) The representational space of numerical magnitude: Illusions of length. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (Colchester) 61:1496–514.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de Hevia, M. D., Girelli, L. & Vallar, G. (2006) Numbers and space: A cognitive illusion? Experimental Brain Research 168:254–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Hevia, M. D. & Spelke, E. S. (2009) Spontaneous mapping of number and space in adults and young children. Cognition 110:198–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fischer, M. H. (2001) Number processing induces spatial performance biases. Neurology 57:822–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Libertus, M. E., Woldorff, M. G. & Brannon, E. M. (2007) Electrophysiological evidence for notation independence in numerical processing. Behavioral Brain Function 3(1). (Online journal).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCloskey, M. (1992) Cognitive mechanisms in numerical processing: Evidence from acquired dyscalculia. Cognition 44:107–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nuerk, H. C., Wood, G. & Willmes, K. (2005) The universal SNARC effect: The association between number magnitude and space is amodal. Experimental Psychology 52:187–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmandt-Besserat, D. (1999) Artifacts and civilization. In: The MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences, ed. Wilson, R. A. & Keil, F. C., pp. 35–37. MIT Press.Google Scholar