Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T22:02:52.078Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Numerical representations are neither abstract nor automatic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2009

Dale J. Cohen
Dale J. Cohen
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina Wilmington, Wilmington, NC 28403. cohend@uncw.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this commentary, I support and augment Cohen Kadosh & Walsh's (CK&W's) argument that numerical representations are not abstract. I briefly review data that support the non-abstract nature of the representation of numbers between zero and one, and I discuss how a failure to test alternative hypotheses has led researchers to erroneously conclude that numerals automatically activate their semantic meaning.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 32 , Issue 3-4 , August 2009 , pp. 332 - 333
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

Cohen, D. J. (2009) Integers do not automatically activate their quantity representations. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 16:332–36.Google Scholar
Cohen, D. J., Ferrell, J. & Johnson, N. (2002) What very small numbers mean. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 131:424–42.Google Scholar
Dehaene, S. & Akhavein, R. (1995) Attention, automaticity, and levels of representation in number processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 21(2):314–26.Google Scholar
Ganor-Stern, D. & Tzelgov, J. (2008) Across-notation automatic numerical processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 34(2):430–37.Google Scholar
Moyer, R. S. & Landauer, T. K. (1967) Time required for judgment of numerical inequality. Nature 215:1519–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed