No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Numerical cognition: Unitary or diversified system(s)?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 December 2021
Abstract
Many researchers, including Clarke and Beck, describe the human numerical system as unitary. We offer an alternative view – the coexistence of several systems; namely, multiple systems (general magnitude, parallel individuation, and symbolic) existing in parallel, ready to be activated depending on the task/need. Based on this alternative view, we present an account for the representation of rational numbers.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Goodale, M. A. (2000). Perception and action in the human visual system. In Gazzaniga, M. (Ed.), The new cognitive neurosciences (pp. 365–377). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Henik, A., Gliksman, Y., Kallai, A., & Leibovich, T. (2017). Size perception and the foundation of numerical processing. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 45–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henik, A., Rafal, R., & Rhodes, D. (1994). Endogenously generated and visually guided saccades after lesions of the human frontal eye fields. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 6, 400–411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leibovich, T., Ashkenazi, S., Rubinsten, O., & Henik, A. (2013). Comparative judgments of symbolic and non-symbolic stimuli yield different patterns of reaction times. Acta Psychologica, 144, 308–315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leibovich, T., Katzin, N., Harel, M., & Henik, A. (2017). From “sense of number” to “sense of magnitude” – The role of continuous magnitudes in numerical cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, e164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sokolowski, H. M., Fias, W., Ononye, C. B., & Ansari, D. (2017). Are numbers grounded in a general magnitude processing system? A functional neuroimaging meta-analysis. Neuropsychologia, 105, 50–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, V. (2003). A theory of magnitude: Common cortical metrics of time, space and quantity. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 483–488.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zimmermann, E. (2018). Small numbers are sensed directly, high numbers constructed from size and density. Cognition, 173, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Target article
The number sense represents (rational) numbers
Related commentaries (26)
A rational explanation for links between the ANS and math
Constructing rationals through conjoint measurement of numerator and denominator as approximate integer magnitudes in tradeoff relations
Contents of the approximate number system
Distinguishing the specific from the recognitional and the canonical, and the nature of ratios
Non-symbolic and symbolic number and the approximate number system
Not so rational: A more natural way to understand the ANS
Numbers in action
Numerical cognition needs more and better distinctions, not fewer
Numerical cognition: Unitary or diversified system(s)?
Numerosities are not ersatz numbers
Numerosity, area-osity, object-osity? Oh my
Perceived number is not abstract
Positing numerosities may be metaphysically extravagant; positing representation of numerosities is not
Ratio-based perceptual foundations for rational numbers, and perhaps whole numbers, too?
Real models: The limits of behavioural evidence for understanding the ANS
Representation of pure magnitudes in ANS
Second-order characteristics don't favor a number-representing ANS
Sizes, ratios, approximations: On what and how the ANS represents
The approximate number system represents magnitude and precision
The approximate number system represents rational numbers: The special case of an empty set
The number sense does not represent numbers, but cardinality comparisons
The number sense represents multitudes and magnitudes
The perception of quantity ain't number: Missing the primacy of symbolic reference
Unwarranted philosophical assumptions in research on ANS
Weighted numbers
What are we doing when we perceive numbers?
Author response
Numbers, numerosities, and new directions