Extrinsic manipulations of the mental number line do not impact SNARC-related influences on the planning and control of action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The spatial numerical association of response codes (so-called SNARC effect) manifests as faster reaction times (RT) to judgments of numerical magnitude in left and right space when cued by low and high numbers, respectively. In addition, Fischer (2003:Vis Cogn) reported that movement times (MT) associated with goal-directed reaching movements are influenced in a direction consistent with the SNARC effect. These findings have been explained by the presence of a mental number line with smaller and larger digit magnitudes preferentially represented in left and right space, respectively. In the present study, we sought to determine whether the magnitude of the SNARC effect for goal-directed reaching is influenced by the premovement manipulation of a real number line. Prior to response cuing participants were briefly (50 ms) presented with an ascending (i.e., digit magnitude increasing from left to right), or descending (i.e., digit magnitude decreasing from left to right) number line. In addition, we included a control condition wherein a number line was not presented in advance of response cuing. Following premovement cuing, low (1,2) or high (8,9) digits were presented and used to visually cue the onset of a left or right space reaching response. Results for RT and MT did not elicit a SNARC effect: a finding consistent across the different premovement visual cuing conditions (i.e., ascending, descending, no number line). Interestingly, however, when total response time was analyzed (RT+MT) a SNARC effect was observed. Based on these findings, we propose that the SNARC effect for reaching responses is represented as an aggregation of the temporal properties of both movement planning and control. Further results suggest that the SNARC effect is refractory to extrinsic manipulations of the mental number line.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".