Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T09:09:28.737Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Slippery platform: The role of automatic and intentional processes in testing the effect of notation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2009

Daniel Algom
Daniel Algom
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat-Aviv 69978, Israel. [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The type of processing of numerical dimensions varies greatly and is governed by context. Considering this flexibility in tandem with a fuzzy demarcation line between automatic and intentional processes, it is suggested that testing the effect of notation should not be confined to automatic processing, in particular to passive viewing. Recent behavioral data satisfying the authors' stipulations reveal a considerable, though perhaps not exclusive, core of common abstract processing.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 32 , Issue 3-4 , August 2009 , pp. 328 - 329
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

Algom, D., Dekel, A. & Pansky, A. (1996) The perception of number from the separability of the stimulus: The Stroop effect revisited. Memory and Cognition 24:557–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ben-Nathan, M. (2009) Multiple representations for numbers: How abstract they are? Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Tel-Aviv University.Google Scholar
Ben-Nathan, M. & Algom, D. (2008) Do the processing of Arabic numbers and numbers' words differ in tasks of magnitude? In: Fechner Day 2008, ed. Schneider, B., Ben-David, B. M., Parker, S. & Wong, W., pp. 129–32. International Society for Psychophysics.Google Scholar
Ben-Nathan, M., Shaki, S., Salti, M. & Algom, D. (2009) Numbers and space: Associations and dissociations themselves. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 16:578–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, D. J. (2009) Integers do not automatically activate their quantity representations. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 16:332–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Damian, M. F. (2004) Asymmetries in the processing of Arabic digits and number words. Memory and Cognition 32:164–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fias, W. (2001) Two routes for the processing of verbal numbers: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Psychological Research – Psychologische Forschung 65(4):242–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fitousi, D. & Algom, D. (2006) Size congruity effects with two-digit numbers: Expanding the number line? Memory and Cognition 34:445–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fitousi, D., Shaki, S. & Algom, D. (2009) The role of parity, physical size, and magnitude in numerical cognition: The SNARC effect revisited. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics 71:143–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guilford, J. P. (1954) Psychometric methods. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Pansky, A. & Algom, D. (1999) Stroop and Garner effects in comparative judgments of numerals: The role of attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 25:39–58.Google Scholar
Pansky, A. & Algom, D. (2002) Comparative judgment of numerosity and numerical magnitude: Attention preempts automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 28:259–74.Google ScholarPubMed
Ratinckx, E., Brysbaert, M. & Fias, W. (2005) Naming two-digit Arabic numerals: Evidence from masked priming studies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 31:1150–63.Google ScholarPubMed
Stevens, S. S. (1951) Mathematics, measurement, and psychophysics. In: Handbook of experimental psychology, ed. Stevens, S. S.. Wiley.Google Scholar