Top

Gepubliceerd in:

17-01-2018 | Original Article

Stimulating numbers: signatures of finger counting in numerosity processing

Auteurs: Elena Sixtus, Oliver Lindemann, Martin H. Fischer

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 1/2020

Abstract

Finger counting is one of the first steps in the development of mature number concepts. With a one-to-one correspondence of fingers to numbers in Western finger counting, fingers hold two numerical meanings: one is based on the number of fingers raised and the second is based on their ordinal position within the habitual finger counting sequence. This study investigated how these two numerical meanings of fingers are intertwined with numerical cognition in adults. Participants received tactile stimulation on their fingertips of one hand and named either the number of fingers stimulated (2, 3, or 4 fingers; Experiment 1) or the number of stimulations on one fingertip (2, 3, or 4 stimulations; Experiment 2). Responses were faster and more accurate when the set of stimulated fingers corresponded to finger counting habits (Experiment 1) and when the number of stimulations matched the ordinal position of the stimulated finger (Experiment 2). These results show that tactile numerosity perception is affected by individual finger counting habits and that those habits give numerical meaning to single fingers.

vorige artikel Finger-counting habits, not finger movements, predict simple arithmetic problem solving

volgende artikel Negative errors in time reproduction tasks

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

All individual stimulation durations range from 47 to 180 ms and all total stimulation durations range from 260 to 640 ms. Although participants might learn that 47 ms could never involve two stimulations, we chose not to use the shortest individual stimulation length for two stimulations, because that would have resulted in a very short (154 ms) total stimulation length which would have given away the numerosity without requiring actually counting the number of individual stimulations. Furthermore, additional analyses showed that there was no training effect selectively for stimulation conditions involving 47 ms-stimulations.

To keep the size of the model reasonable, only factors of theoretical interest were modeled. For instance, the factor Hand (left/right) was not included. Moreover, including Hand as a fixed factor would not bring about any significant main effects or interactions in the complete models except for a three-way interaction of DC × Hand × NUM in the sequential condition.

The index finger of the opposite hand was always the responding finger, so one could expect interactions with stimulations to the index finger. We therefore coded a new factor “Response Finger” (i.e., index finger or not) and ran the (generalized) linear mixed models with the fixed factors Congruency, Response Finger, and their interaction and as random factors Subject, Response condition, and Stimulation pattern and with the random slopes determined as described above; there were no random slopes for the RT analysis and by-subject random slopes for Congruency and Response Finger as well as by-pattern random slopes for Congruency for the accuracy analysis. There were no significant interactions between Congruency and Response Finger for RTs or accuracy.

Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01.CrossRef

Bender, A., & Beller, S. (2012). Nature and culture of finger counting: Diversity and representational effects of an embodied cognitive tool. Cognition, 124(2), 156–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.05.005.CrossRefPubMed

Bender, L. (Producer), & Tarantino, Q. (Director). (2009). Inglorious Basterds [Motion Picture]. United States: Universal Pictures.

Brozzoli, C., Ishihara, M., Göbel, S. M., Salemme, R., Rossetti, Y., & Farnè, A. (2008). Touch perception reveals the dominance of spatial over digital representation of numbers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(14), 5644–5648.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Casasanto, D. (2009). Embodiment of abstract concepts: Good and bad in right- and left-handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(3), 351–367. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015854.CrossRef

Cohen, Z. Z., Aisenberg, D., & Henik, A. (2016). The effects of training on tactile enumeration. Psychological Research. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-016-0835-5.CrossRef

Cohen, Z. Z., & Henik, A. (2016). Effects of numerosity range on tactile and visual enumeration. Perception, 45(1–2), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006615614662.CrossRefPubMed

Cohen, Z. Z., Naparstek, S., & Henik, A. (2014). Tactile enumeration of small quantities using one hand. Acta Psychologica, 150, 26–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.03.011.CrossRefPubMed

Coolidge, F. L., & Overmann, K. A. (2012). Numerosity, abstraction, and the emergence of symbolic thinking. Current Anthropology 53(2), 204–225. https://doi.org/10.1086/664818.CrossRef

Cousineau, D. (2005). Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson’s method. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 1(1), 42–45.CrossRef

Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(3), 371–396.CrossRef

Di Luca, S., Granà, A., Semenza, C., Seron, X., & Pesenti, M. (2006). Finger-digit compatibility in Arabic numeral processing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(9), 1648–1663. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210500256839.CrossRef

Di Luca, S., & Pesenti, M. (2008). Masked priming effect with canonical finger numeral configurations. Experimental Brain Research, 185(1), 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-007-1132-8.CrossRefPubMed

Di Luca, S., & Pesenti, M. (2011). Finger numeral representations: More than just another symbolic code. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 272. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00272.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Domahs, F., Kaufmann, L., & Fischer, M. H. (Eds.) (2012). Handy numbers: Finger counting and numerical cognition. Lausanne: Frontiers Media SA.

Domahs, F., Moeller, K., Huber, S., Willmes, K., & Nuerk, H.-C. (2010). Embodied numerosity: Implicit hand-based representations influence symbolic number processing across cultures. Cognition, 116(2), 251–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.05.007.CrossRefPubMed

Elbert, T., Pantev, C., Wienbruch, C., Rockstroh, B., & Taub, E. (1995). Increased cortical representation of the fingers of the left hand in string players. Science, 270, 305–307.CrossRefPubMed

Fischer, M. H., & 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. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00260.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Franconeri, S. L., & Simons, D. J. (2003). Moving and looming stimuli capture attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 65(7), 999–1010. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194829.CrossRef

Gallace, A., Tan, H. Z., & Spence, C. (2008). Can tactile stimuli be subitised? An unresolved controversy within the literature on numerosity judgments. Perception, 37(5), 782–800. https://doi.org/10.1068/p5767.CrossRefPubMed

Imbo, I., Vandierendonck, A., & Fias, W. (2011). Passive hand movements disrupt adults’ counting strategies. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 201. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00201.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kliegl, R., Masson, M. E. J., & Richter, E. M. (2010). A linear mixed model analysis of masked repetition priming. Visual Cognition, 18(5), 655–681. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506280902986058.CrossRef

Krause, F., Bekkering, H., & Lindemann, O. (2013). A feeling for numbers: Shared metric for symbolic and tactile numerosities. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00007.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lindemann, O., Alipour, A., & Fischer, M. H. (2011). Finger counting habits in Middle Eastern and Western individuals: An online survey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(4), 566–578. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022111406254.CrossRef

Lucidi, A., & Thevenot, C. (2014). Do not count on me to imagine how I act: Behavior contradicts questionnaire responses in the assessment of finger counting habits. Behavior Research Methods, 46(4), 1079–1087. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0447-1.CrossRefPubMed

McCarthy, L., & Olsen, K. N. (2017). A “looming bias” in spatial hearing? Effects of acoustic intensity and spectrum on categorical sound source localization. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 79(1), 352–362. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-016-1201-9.CrossRef

Michaux, N., Masson, N., Pesenti, M., & Andres, M. (2013). Selective interference of finger movements on basic addition and subtraction problem solving. Experimental Psychology, 60(3), 197–205. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000188.CrossRefPubMed

Moher, J., Sit, J., & Song, J. -H. (2015). Goal-directed action is automatically biased towards looming motion. Vision Research, 113(Pt B), 188–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2014.08.005.CrossRef

Morrissey, K. R., Liu, M., Kang, J., Hallett, D., & Wang, Q. (2016). Cross-cultural and intra-cultural differences in finger-counting habits and number magnitude processing: Embodied numerosity in Canadian and Chinese university students. Journal of Numerical Cognition, 2(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.5964/jnc.v2i1.14.CrossRef

Moyer, R. S., & Landauer, T. K. (1967). Time required for judgements of numerical inequality. Nature, 215, 1519–1520.CrossRefPubMed

Pika, S., Nicoladis, E., & Marentette, P. (2009). How to order a beer: Cultural differences in the use of conventional gestures for numbers. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40(1), 70–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022108326197.CrossRef

R Core Team. (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/.

Riello, M., & Rusconi, E. (2011). Unimanual SNARC effect: Hand matters. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 372. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00372.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Rinaldi, L., Gallucci, M., & Girelli, L. (2016). Spatial-numerical consistency impacts on preschoolers’ numerical representation: Children can count on both peripersonal and personal space. Cognitive Development, 37, 9–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2015.10.006.CrossRef

Sixtus, E., Fischer, M. H., & Lindemann, O. (2017). Finger posing primes number comprehension. Cognitive Processing, 18(3), 237–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-017-0804-y.CrossRefPubMed

Takeuchi, T. (1997). Visual search of expansion and contraction. Vision Research, 37(15), 2083–2090. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(96)00225-8.CrossRefPubMed

van Ede, F., Jensen, O., & Maris, E. (2010). Tactile expectation modulates pre-stimulus beta-band oscillations in human sensorimotor cortex. NeuroImage, 51(2), 867–876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.02.053.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Stimulating numbers: signatures of finger counting in numerosity processing
Auteurs: Elena Sixtus
Oliver Lindemann
Martin H. Fischer
Publicatiedatum: 17-01-2018
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 1/2020
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-0982-y

Andere artikelen Uitgave 1/2020

Coding valence in touchscreen interactions: hand dominance and lateral movement influence valence appraisals of emotional pictures

Original Article

Count on arousal: introducing a new method for investigating the effects of emotional valence and arousal on visual search performance

Original Article

Startle reflex modulation by affective face “Emoji” pictographs

Original Article

I don’t need your attention: ostracism can narrow the cone of gaze

Original Article

Action compatibility in spatial knowledge developed through virtual navigation

Original Article

Intertwining personal and reward relevance: evidence from the drift-diffusion model

Original Article

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Welkom bij THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Registreer

Login

Stimulating numbers: signatures of finger counting in numerosity processing

Abstract

Andere artikelen Uitgave 1/2020

Coding valence in touchscreen interactions: hand dominance and lateral movement influence valence appraisals of emotional pictures

Count on arousal: introducing a new method for investigating the effects of emotional valence and arousal on visual search performance

Startle reflex modulation by affective face “Emoji” pictographs

I don’t need your attention: ostracism can narrow the cone of gaze

Action compatibility in spatial knowledge developed through virtual navigation

Intertwining personal and reward relevance: evidence from the drift-diffusion model

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Welkom bij THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Registreer

Login

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Coding valence in touchscreen interactions: hand dominance and lateral movement influence valence appraisals of emotional pictures

Count on arousal: introducing a new method for investigating the effects of emotional valence and arousal on visual search performance

Startle reflex modulation by affective face “Emoji” pictographs

I don’t need your attention: ostracism can narrow the cone of gaze

Action compatibility in spatial knowledge developed through virtual navigation

Intertwining personal and reward relevance: evidence from the drift-diffusion model